Varman Et Al JMM 2011

8/3/2019 Varman Et Al JMM 2011

1/24

This article was downloaded by: [Per Skln]On: 10 October 2011, At: 01:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Marketing ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20

Market subjectivity and neoliberal

governmentality in higher educationRohit Varman

a, Biswatosh Saha

a& Per Skln

b

aIndian Institute of Management, India

b

Karlstad University, SwedenAvailable online: 10 Oct 2011

To cite this article: Rohit Varman, Biswatosh Saha & Per Skln (2011): Market subjectivity andneoliberal governmentality in higher education, Journal of Marketing Management, 27:11-12,1163-1185

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20


2/24

Journal of Marketing Management

Vol. 27, Nos. 1112, October 2011, 11631185

Market subjectivity and neoliberal governmentality

in higher education

Rohit Varman, Indian Institute of Management, IndiaBiswatosh Saha, Indian Institute of Management, IndiaPer Skln, Karlstad University, Sweden

Abstract Using an interpretive case study in a business school in India, thisresearch examines student behaviour and offers an understanding of amarketisation process in higher education. The study deploys Foucaultsconceptualisation of governmentality and uncovers processes through which

market subjectivity is fostered among students as they strive to becomeresponsible, active, and entrepreneurial subjects. The subject position isattributed to several governmental discourses of peer pressure, abnormality,uncritical pedagogy, loan repayment, and elitism that prevail in the businessschool. The study further highlights the roles of English language and preferencefor western corporations which are unique to postcolonial India. Marketsubjectivity results in the prevalence of instrumental rationality, failure todevelop a critical academic perspective, subordination of social concerns, anddisenchantment and exclusion among some students.

Keywords governmentality; higher-education marketisation; neoliberalism;student behaviour; market subjectivity

Introduction

In recent years, several scholars have reported marketisation of higher educationacross the world (Bragg, 2007; Gibbs, 2001; Yokoyama, 2008). A central issue in theprocess of marketisation of higher education is the creation of market subjectivity

among students. This process is particularly relevant in the context of the currenttrajectory of neoliberal capitalism as the Third World is increasingly incorporatedinto global markets and marketing systems. Yet, little extant theorisation in marketingsystematically uncovers the processes through which students are converted intomarket subjects in higher-education institutions in the Third World. In this research,deploying the concept of governmentality, we offer insights into a process throughwhich students are converted into market subjects in India. Our critical analysis of

ISSN 0267-257X print/ISSN 1472-1376 online 2011 Westburn Publishers Ltd.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134http://www.tandfonline.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134http://www.tandfonline.com/http://www.tandfonline.com/http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134


3/24

1164 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 27

market subjectivity helps us to uncover several problematic consequences for studentsfrom the perspectives of academic learning and education in a Third World society.

Our emphasis on neoliberal governmentality helps us to understand a discursivecreation of market subjectivity that contributes to conformity to an order whichemphasises a dominant role of markets (Foucault, 2007). A governmentality

contributes to exercise of power in which people define themselves and the socialworlds in which they live through conformity to dominant discourses (Dean, 1999;Foucault, 2007; Rose, 1999). Neoliberalism is a form of governmentality thatworks primarily through institutions of markets and in which subjects are expectedto be active, responsible, self-governing, and entrepreneurial in making gains forthemselves. In this research, we offer insights into student behaviour in an Indianbusiness school. Our research shows that a neoliberal governmentality is prevalentin the business school and contributes to market subjectivity of students. We showthat discourses of peer pressure, abnormality, uncritical pedagogy, loan repayment,and elitism constitute the governmentality. Several of these discursive practices

emerge because of the uniqueness of the Indian context that is characterised byhigh levels of socio-economic disparities, limited opportunities of social mobility,and a relatively recent shift to neoliberal state policies. Market subjectivity resultsin the prevalence of instrumental rationality, failure to develop a critical academicperspective, subordination of social concerns, and disenchantment and exclusionamong some students. In uncovering neoliberal governmentality in higher education,we emphasise the roles of pastoral and disciplinary powers in conjunction with self-governance. We further highlight the roles of competition, residential proximity,English language, and preference for western corporations, which are unique to theIndian context and have not been adequately understood in the creation of marketsubjectivity in higher education. These aspects of market subjectivity also help us touncover elements of postcoloniality that have not been comprehended in the paststudies on neoliberal governmentality in higher education. Our findings help to offerinsights into marketisation of higher education in the Third World and to criticallyanalyse its consequences.

Theoretical considerations

It is widely acknowledged that market forces are increasingly affecting and shapinghigher education across the globe (Hemsley-Brown & Oplatka, 2006). Several writers

have argued in favour of marketisation and have supported consumer sovereigntyand producer autonomy associated with the process (e.g., Jongbloed, 2003). In thisview, students are idolised as sovereign consumers and universities as autonomousservice providers (Datar, Garvin, & Cullen, 2010). Some view this as a benign processthrough which individuals are converted into market subjects in their quest of greatereducational capital (Neu & Quantanilla, 2008; Peters, 2005).

Several other researchers have taken a critical view of the marketisation ofhigher education. For example, Gibbs (2001) has suggested that higher-educationinstitutions are needed to inculcate critical thinking about markets and should notbe marketised. Similarly, Lynch (2006) reports that marketisation leads to elitism

and production of commercially oriented professionals rather than public interestprofessionals. Supporting this view, Bertelsen (2008) has observed that marketisationis leading to commodification of knowledge and to vocationalism in universities.


4/24

Varman et al. Market subjectivity and neoliberal governmentality in higher education 1165

Taking a particularly critical view of students as consumers, Molesworth, Nixon, andScullion (2009) have suggested that students have become degree seekers insteadof learners. Moreover, Gross and Hogler (2005) criticise the deployment of theconsumer metaphor to describe students and argue that marketisation contributes to adecline in academic learning (see also Datar et al., 2010). In a similar vein, Lowrie and

Willmott (2009) are critical of the increasing emphasis on accreditation that resultsfrom marketisation of education. Accordingly, such market-driven accreditationprocesses produce education models that are insensitive to local and social needs (seealso Lowrie, 2008). We draw upon these critical analyses of marketisation and useFoucaults concept of governmentality to interpret student subjectivity in a businessschool in India. In the following section, we explicate the concept and its relevancefor our research.

Unpacking governmentality and neoliberalism

In recent years, some studies on marketisation of higher education have used theconcept of governmentality to critically evaluate its consequences for academicprocesses (e.g., Bragg, 2007; Nadesan, 2006; Yokoyama, 2008). Foucault (2007,2008) developed the concept of governmentality as a critique of models ofgovernment, which presuppose that government is closely associated with thesovereign or the central state. Foucault argues that governing is not only afeature of the sovereign/the state, but also a feature of other actors andinstitutions (such as heads of families, teachers, and the church). Foucaults (1977,1981) conceptualisation of government is associated with what he labels bio-poweror the government of the social body (Clegg, Courpasson, & Phillips, 2006, p. 53).This implies a re-orientation of a government from securing the property andterritory of the sovereign to seeing the population as something not to coerce orrepress, but rather as a resource to exploit. Moreover, Foucault (1977) emphasisedthe role of discourses to understand power in a society. Accordingly, modern societiesare embedded in discourses channelled through educational systems, families, privateenterprises, etc. that shape subjects who contribute to economic performance.

Thus, governmentalities are based on and legitimated by systems of knowledgeor discourses rather than a sovereign force. Generally, a discourse can be definedas a particular way of talking about and understanding the world (or an aspectof the world) (Phillips & Jrgensen, 2002, p. 1). More specifically, a discoursecan be understood as a fixed structure of signs that gives meaning and determines

what can be said within a particular institutional or societal domain that it regulates(Laclau & Mouffe, 1985), such as higher education in the present case. Thus, adiscourse is performative as it describes and shapes the social world (Cochoy, 1998).A governmental discourse or a governmentality achieves this outcome by promotingcertain rationalities (ways of knowing) and by furthering specific mentalities (waysof thinking) which inform particular types of government and foster specific humanconducts (Dean, 1999; Foucault, 1981, 2007; Rose, 1999). Foucault (2007) definesgovernment as the conduct of conduct. With the first conduct that comes from theverb to conduct, Foucault implies that government is about leading, directing, andguiding in a deliberate way. With the second conduct, the noun, Foucault refers to

peoples thinking, actions, and emotions the object of government. Thus, conductof conduct means a deliberate direction of peoples articulated set of behaviours.In the context of higher education, Bragg (2007) draws upon the concept to show


5/24


the role of governmentality in student subjectivity and to illustrate how a project ofstudent voice gets mired in power relationships and becomes a project of control.

From the above exposition it is evident that the notion of governmentality isbased on a particular understanding of power. While the state-centred models ofgovernment, such as those suggested by Machiavelli and Hobbes are informed by a

sovereign understanding of power, Foucaults notion of governmentality is informedby a discursive view (Clegg et al., 2006). According to the sovereign model, power isvested with some people or institutions implying that holders of power can forceothers who lack power to do things against their will. Sovereign power is thusassociated with coercion and is conceptualised as a negative force. Foucault (1977,1981) argued that key aspects of power are embedded in discourses or systemsof knowledge. A key proposition in this power/knowledge view is that discoursesregulate human relationships and power does not belong to certain agents orinstitutions. More specifically, discourses or regimes of power/knowledge prescribe subject positions to individuals, ordering their constitution of identity as students,

managers, physicians, or academics.Foucault has been criticised by some scholars for taking a contradictory positionon subjectivity. Specifically the critique has focused on his inability to resolve theincompatibility between the subject position caught in the disciplinary/confessionalmode of power in his earlier writings and the emphasis on the self-constitutingsubject in his later work (e.g., Zizek, 2000). Accordingly, this creates an unresolvedcontradiction between social determination and autonomy of subjects or their abilityto offer resistance. Our own position on subjectivity is in line with Deleuzes(1988) interpretation of Foucault and his argument that creation of a social subject isalways an incomplete process. A subject can never be completely determined and hasthe ability to self-reflect and detach through doubling of the self (Deleuze, 1988).Thus, subject positions are not complete personalities, but are differential positionswith which a discourse provides actors in order for them to constitute themselves(Laclau & Mouffe, 1985). Latour (2005), makes an analogy between subject positionsa discourse offers to humans and plug-ins the Internet provides to computers. Whensurfing the Internet, access to a specific site may be denied because of a computerlacking in the right plug-in. A friendly warning will appear on the screen suggestingthat a piece of software needs to be downloaded which once installed on your system[computer], will allow you to activate what you were unable to see before (Latour,2005, p. 207). In the same way as the Internet provides a computer with the necessaryplug-ins, a discourse provides humans with plug-ins that they enact to constitute

themselves. Thus, from a Foucauldian perspective, a subject and subjectivity shouldbe understood not as a stable constellation of attributes, beliefs, values, motives, orexperiences residing within an individual, but as a totality of subject positions that aperson enacts in a given time and space. In a governmentality analysis, enactment ofsubject positions is associated with self-government. Here, self-government impliesthat a reflexive modern person guided by a discourse knows what is right andwrong and orients themself towards a particular subjectivity.1 Drawing upon thisinterpretation, Marginson (1997) has reported that marketisation of higher educationin Australia is shifting individuals away from relations of force and into relations

1This interpretation of subjectivity is different from that of Zizek (2000) who has suggested that in thecontemporary world, subject formation is characterised by ironic distance through which subjects play outtheir social roles without any commitment or attachment to dominant cultural codes.


6/24


of power in which governing happens through specific subject positions from adistance.

It should be further noted that Foucault (2007) developed the concept ofgovernmentality in tandem with a critical reading of liberal doctrines. Consequently,Foucault drew upon the concept to analyse neoliberal forms of government and

the constitution of a particular type of market subject that neoliberal discourseenvisions (Dean, 1999, 2007; OMalley, 1992; Rose, 1999; Skln, 2009, 2010).The nodal point of neoliberalism is freedom, a notion that seems to be at odds witha governmental rationality. However, the freedom that neoliberalism espouses is ahighly qualified one. In a neoliberal society a subject is free as long as they engagein self-governance and constitutes themself along the line of the market subjectivitythat neoliberal discourse espouses, i.e. as an active, entrepreneurial, and responsibleindividual. In comparison with a welfare society that emphasises collectivised risk-taking, a neoliberal society encourages responsibilisation or privatisation of riskmanagement (Rose, 1993, p. 296). This creates an individual obligation to adopt

a prudent and market-oriented relation to risk and to life more generally (Du Gay,1996, 2000). Drawing upon Foucault, OMalley (1992) interprets responsibilisationas a governmental practice that creates self-interested market subjects who makechoices about their lifestyles, education, health, and welfare without burdeningthe state. Peters (2005, p. 131) offers a more optimistic interpretation and arguesthat responsibilisation may also be premised upon a rationality that encouragesa political regime of ethical self-constitution as consumer-citizens. Hence, Peters(2005) suggests that ethical or socially responsible conduct of actors is central to theidea of responsibilisation.

Neoliberalisation is coupled to individualisation and subjectification processes thatfoster a particular market subject. Neoliberalism is a governmentality that promotesa government disassociated from the state and frames a population as a resource tobe economically exploited through processes of marketisation (Dean, 1995, 1999;Rose, 1999; Skln, Fougre, & Fellesson, 2008). In the context of higher education,Marshall (2004) has labelled this form of power as busno-power as it is directedthrough the mind of its subject. He further argues that under the neoliberal model ofeducation, busnocratic rationality is created that emphasises narrow technical skillsand saleability over critical reflection and human emancipation.

The subject positions promoted by a governmentality such as neoliberalism are, ata micro level, primarily enforced through disciplinary and pastoral power (Covaleski,Dirsmith, Heian, & Samuel, 1998; Foucault, 1977, 1981). Disciplinary power

practices embody the norms of the regimes of power/knowledge in which they areembedded. Functioning as examinations (e.g., student placements practices) theyoperate by revealing gaps between a persons present state and an idealised norm.This enables control of people by fostering a movement towards the norm by closingthe gap between the actual and ideal subject positions. Hence, disciplinary powergoverns by fostering normalisation. Pastoral power fosters confessions in relation toa normative system. Through avowal of innermost thoughts, a confessor regulatesthemself towards the normative system with or without the guidance of an authority,who could be a pastor, a senior student, a coach or a teacher. While disciplinarypower governs from the outside in or by controlling departures from the regulatory

discourse, pastoral power defines subjectivity from the inside out or by comparinga subjects avowals to an external normative system (Covaleski et al., 1998).Nadesan (2006) in examining an educational programme designed to increase student


7/24


compliance and responsibility reports a simultaneous deployment of governmental,disciplinary, and pastoral powers. Although Nadesan (2006) acknowledges that agovernmentality is characterised by a shift from external coercion to self-government,the author admits that punishment and guidance for maladapted individuals are alsocommon with pathologisation of such individuals.

The pressure put on an individual by disciplinary and pastoral power practices toconform to the subject position promoted by a dominant governmentality is usuallyextensive. This does not imply, however, that resistance is not possible. Accordingto Foucauldian interpretations, actors offer resistance to a particular managerialdiscourse by deploying other available countervailing discourses such as Keynesianor Marxist economic theories in the case of neoliberalism (Covaleski et al., 1998;Skln, 2010). By drawing on discourses competing with a dominant discourse, anactor can delegitimise it, question the subject positions it promotes, critique thedisciplinary and pastoral practices associated with it, and offer an alternative (seealso Gabriel & Lang, 1995). Thus, a subject is simultaneously constituted by power

and constitutes themself through resistance.In summary, under neoliberal capitalism marketisation of higher educationis becoming ubiquitous. While some authors celebrate the process as liberatingand responsibilising, many others are critical of it as a harmful process forlearning and knowledge creation. The concept of governmentality casts in sharprelief aspects of power in marketisation processes that remain hidden from thetraditional view. An emphasis on the creation of market subjectivity throughneoliberal governmentality is one such important aspect for our study. It helps tounderstand a process by which power/knowledge practices foster people to takeon a responsible, active, and entrepreneurial subjectivity. In the subsequent sectionswe delve further into processes that foster neoliberal market subjectivity among thestudent participants in our case study.

Research context and methodology

In order to understand student behaviour, we conducted a case study in a top-rankingbusiness school in India. Several scholars have argued that as a result of the economiccrisis of the early 1990s, the Indian state under pressure from the World Bank andInternational Monetary Fund introduced a structural adjustment programme thatbrought in the neoliberal agenda of governance in the country (Chandrashekhar &

Ghosh, 2000; Kurien, 1995). Neoliberalism has allowed widespread privatisationof state corporations and reduction in welfare policies of the government (Chandra,2010). The current government believes that neoliberalism has created greater wealthand higher growth rates in the economy (Chandra, 2010). Many scholars argue thatneoliberalism has contributed to rural poverty, increase in inequality, unsustainableexploitation of natural resources, private looting of public resources, and neglect ofthe poorer sections of the population (e.g., P. Patnaik, 2006; U. Patnaik, 2007).

The neoliberal shift has led to an unprecedented boom for business educationin the country. There are 1817 management schools in India, with an enrolmentcapacity of 141402 students, offering post-graduate programmes that are recognised

by the All India Council for Technical Education, which is an apex state regulatorybody in the country (All India Council for Technical Education, n.d.). Most of thesebusiness schools have started in the last twenty years. The large-scale privatisation


8/24


and opening up of the economy to global corporations have led to a steep rise in thesalaries of the managerial cadre and a great demand for management graduates in thecountry. The business schools are a result and important symbols of neoliberalism inthe country. Popular media and middle-class discourses privilege high-paying jobs inprivate corporations and contribute to the institutionalisation of neoliberal rationality

in the society. Admissions into the top-ranked management schools are based on a two-tier

process in which a common national examination that shortlists candidates isfollowed by screening based on personal interviews conducted by each school. Thecommon entrance examination is conducted only in English and tests applicantson the dimensions of quantitative, analytical, and English-language skills. A largenumber of applicants vie for admissions into the top schools. In 2009, for instance,217,520 applicants took the examination for 1500 seats in the top four schools(Wadhwa, 2010). Thus, the process of gaining admission into the top schools isexceedingly competitive and difficult. Currently, all top management schools are self-

financed through student fees and other revenues generated by these institutions.Fees in the top schools have been on the rise in recent years and are currentlyapproximately INR 1.3 million for the two-year MBA programme. Most studentstake loans provided by the banking system to pay their fees (Palety, 2009).

The distribution of resources and placement opportunities for students acrossthese schools is highly skewed. Job offers from multinational investment banks andmanagement consultants, often at foreign locations/postings are most prized andthese offers largely remain restricted to the top three or four schools in the country(MBA Universe, 2010). Such top recruiters make job offers to around 2030% of abatch with the US dollar denominated salaries (Pathak, 2007) that can be 10 timesthe lowest salaries offered by the other firms in the same business school (Basu, 2010;Business Standard, 2011).

In order to understand student behaviour, we conducted in-depth interviews with17 second-year MBA students, who had already completed their summer internships.As business-school teachers, we could gain entry into the setting and access students.The participants were selected through a process of purposive sampling in whichwe tried to interview students based on their interests, profiles, and different levelsof preparation and participation in the recruitment process. We interviewed thesestudents on a diverse set of issues that included questions about their prior academicbackgrounds, reasons for choosing MBA education, choice of business school, career,and courses. We also questioned these students on their academic and non-academic

experiences in the business school. In addition, we interviewed an ex-student whohad opted out of the summer placement process during his MBA programme tounderstand a different perspective on student behaviour. This ex-student and twoother participants were the negative cases in our sample because of their resistanceto market subjectivity (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). These students resisted neoliberalgovernmentality and tried to deploy discourses of the Left to create alternatesubjectivities. These negative cases enriched our analysis in two important ways. First,these cases helped us to understand how resistance and alternate subjectivities inthe setting were created, sustained, and countervailed. Second, these cases offereda more critical account of the hegemonic discourse and practice in the business

school. These critical accounts helped us to understand certain features of neoliberalgovernmentality that were not articulated by the other participants as they took theseelements for granted due to their internalisation and disciplining.


9/24


The interviews ranged from 45 minutes to 2 hours and 45 minutes, with anaverage length of 90 minutes. The interviews were conducted in English and latertranscribed for analysis. The data analysis was ongoing and iterative in a processconsistent with emergent design and the constant comparative method (Strauss &Corbin, 1990). Following an emergent design, we did not try to develop hypotheses

a priori but allowed the questions and relationships on student subjectivity to emergeinductively (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1998). Our emphasis in following this designwas on creating a reflexive process through which the learning from prior interviews,analyses, and theoretical exposure was ploughed back by us into subsequent datacollection, analyses, and theorising. In our analysis, we started by identifying opencodes and followed these with axial codes that helped us in uncovering some ofthe key themes. Finally, we did selective coding to integrate our themes with extanttheory. We continued to collect and analyse data until we achieved saturation.We identified saturation as a point of closure in our data collection and analysis atwhich no new information was emerging from our informants in terms of depth and

breadth of their subject positions (Bowen, 2008).The data generated from different students helped us to understand neoliberalgovernmentality in the business school. Two researchers conducted interviews withdifferent students and this helped to achieve investigator and data triangulations.Triangulation along with purposive sampling and negative case analysis add to thetrustworthiness of our findings (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993; Glaser& Strauss, 1967). Finally, we informed participants about our roles as researchers andobtained their consent for collecting data. We have maintained anonymity by usingpseudonyms for the participants and certain rituals in the school.

Findings

In order to understand market subjectivity in an Indian business school, we primarilyfocus our analyses on the discursive practices of our student participants. We haveorganised our findings under three broad themes. As described in the earlier section,we identified dominant themes through a process of open, axial, and selective codingin which we started by comparing salient issues emerging from individual transcriptswith the entire data set. Thus, the themes presented here, which are illustratedthrough individual responses, are the broad patterns in our data that have beenfurther examined through a negative case analysis. The three themes are Neoliberal

Governmentality and Dominance of Market Subjectivity, Discursive Nurturing ofMarket Subjectivity, and The Problematic Consequences of Market Subjectivity.The first theme helps us to understand the key elements of market subjectivity.The second theme identifies discourses that contribute to the reproduction of theprevalent governmentality. The third theme helps in understanding the problematicoutcomes of the prevailing governmentality.

Neoliberal governmentality and dominance of market subjectivity

Under neoliberal governmentality, individual subjects are expected to be responsible,

entrepreneurial, and active. In a neoliberal order, markets are constituted by actorswho govern themselves in relation to such subjectivity traits that further discoursesof monetary incentives and maximisation of gains. This process sutures together


10/24


self-governance of actors with the requirements of a market and produces marketsubjects. We divide this theme into two sub-tropes of Emphasising Job MarketSaleability and Celebrating Monetisation of Returns. These two tropes help usto highlight the discourses of getting jobs and monetary returns in the academicprogramme. These discourses constitute the subject positions of our participants.

Emphasising job market saleability

Self-governance emanating from neoliberal rationality of our participants is evidentfrom the emphasis on high-paying jobs. We were informed by Kartik, who had lefta job in the US to attend the MBA programme, The two years finally boil down toplacement what you remember is that you came here to get a good job and you getout after all the effort with the job. Students put considerable emphases on preparingfor summer internships and on the final placements. We were informed by Asit that,Everything in this place revolves around placements. Asit went on to suggest that

students, just treat this place as a placement agency. . . . There is no interest in coursesand there is no need to study. Thus, as market subjects, the ability to sell skills is ofparamount importance in the job market. We were further informed by Anjan:

I took my summers very seriously. I spent around 11.5 months preparing formy summer interviews . . . Cruises were very helpful as a form of informalcoaching . . . I formed a group of three and we prepared for months workinguntil six in the morning every day.

Question: So what happens to your lectures?

I also attended my classes and yes but morning 8:30 classes suffered. You begin

to realise that this [job] interview is more important than the academic part of it.The ultimate goal is to get a good job.

Anjans key objective was to get a summer job with a consulting organisation whichhe achieved by preparing for a significant amount of time. Cruises are believed tobe helpful because these are sessions on placements in which the first-year studentsare given training by seniors to prepare for summer jobs. A key to this process isthe pastoral practice of informal coaching through which senior students guide andlead the subject to the right stance in relation to the job-market. Another second-yearstudent, Prerana, suggests:

Everybody blows up CV. Incredibly, I had helped one of my friends with foundingof a lab. I put it in the CV as member of the founding team, but then peopleasked me to change it to founder when I showed it to seniors. That is why I callit a placement bureau if you are an academic you do not think on these lines.

According to Prerana, the academic institution was more of a placement bureau inwhich the main objective of the students was to get a good job. Prerana furtherbelieves that students are often forced by the market-driven recruitment process tomake exaggerations about their achievements.

In summary, we found that students emphasise summer jobs and final placements

over most of the other activities in the business school. These students spend asubstantial amount of time developing skills that help them to perform well in thejob market.


11/24


Celebrating monetisation of returns

A related aspect that market subjectivity promotes is maximisation of individualgains. Hence, among the interviewed MBA students high salaries constitute animportant element of the governmental discourse. When we asked Ashok about

what motivates students, he told us, Money . . . Students here are middle classand money is a big motivator. When we further asked Ashok why he wanted topursue a career in investment banking, he said, My main motivation is to makemoney. The top recruiters who pay the highest salaries denominated in dollarsalso make offers for postings in foreign locations. These are the most lucrative jobsand Dilip informed us, Everyone you meet talks about McKinsey, I-banking. Youare told that these are the people living their lives and others are the unfortunateones. In this discourse, influenced by postcoloniality, the other recruiters, includinglarge domestic firms are often looked down upon and Prerana argued, Tata Motors[a large Indian manufacturing firm] is laid back, while Royal Bank of Scotland isdynamic. Thus, with Prerana we see a hierarchy based on money overlaid with a

postcolonial hierarchy (see Varman & Saha, 2009). Asit further informed us: 90% ofthe students here are not sure what careers they want to choose even after two yearsof studying management. They are willing to take any job as long as it is paying. Thatis disturbing.

Asit is involved with the planning of placements and closely observes therecruitment process. He reports that most of the students are only motivated bymoney. He does not like this emphasis on money, but can do little to change therationality that prevails in the school.

In summary, students in the business school are driven by market subjectivity,which in turn is constituted by the neoliberal rationality of saleability and

maximisation of monetary gains. We believe that the possibility of making materialand social gains associated with market subjectivity influence this outcome. Thestudents neglect other aspects of their academic lives and often distort their interestsand experiences to fit into the market logic that neoliberal governmentality fosters inthe business school. We do not see our participants as passive recipients of the subjectposition, but rather as self-constituting actors who reflexively seek market subjectivityto help them achieve their goals of becoming part of an elite class in Indian society.

Discursive nurturing of market subjectivity

The current socio-economic context in India is guided by neoliberalism. Studentswho join the MBA programme are already influenced by neoliberal governmentality.We found that several discourses further nurture neoliberal governmentality andfoster market subjectivity among our student participants. We have grouped thesediscursive elements under the two sub-themes of Discourses of Peer Pressure,Competition, and Pathologisation, and Discourses of Uncritical Pedagogy and ElitistPolicies. These discourses cover aspects such as disciplining by seniors, pro-businessteaching, burden of debt, elitism of higher education, and fear of abnormality amongthe student participants.

Discourses of peer pressure, competition, and pathologisationWe found that the second-year students by employing informal and formaldisciplinary and pastoral power practices play an important role in nurturing market


12/24


subjectivity among the students who enter the MBA programme. According to Dilip,an ex-student: Your conditioning happens the day you enter the campus. . . .The message in these formal and informal interactions [with seniors] is clearly thatplacement is the most important part of the process here.

There are several practices through which the importance of placements is created.

One of the key aspects is the process of disciplining and pastoral guidance ofthe first-year students by the second-years. Hari, who is an undergrad from a topranked Indian school and has worked in an investment bank before joining thebusiness school, reported that CV writing and seniors played important roles in theprogramme:

Question: How did you prepare your CV?

I talked to 4050 seniors and discussed my CV . . . as many people as you meetgive you different perspectives . . . you never know whether you are there.

Question: You worked with one of the top investment banks? Why did you need to doit?

It never hurts to get more opinions.

Question: If everyone is doing it, should it make a difference?

Because everyone is doing it, you have to do it. You do not want to be different.

Question: How much time did you spend in your undergrad programme on your CV?

It would be around 15 hours at max.

Question: Why do you do it here?

It is drilled into you here by your seniors . . . your CV is very important . . . It is24 hours, 7 days a week and it is bound to influence you.

Hari spent around 100 hours on developing his CV in the first year. He hadacademically and professionally excelled in the past and it was surprising that he spentsuch long hours in developing his CV. However, Haris behaviour could be explainedthrough the rituals of CV writing and his situation as a Third World market subject.Developing a CV is an elaborate ritual in which at first a 1015 page (or even longer)master CV is produced that lists every achievement of a student. A master CV isfinally reduced, after extensive tutoring by senior students, to a one page document

that summarises the key achievements of a student. Despite past excellence, Haribelieves that he is situated in a Third World country in which good positions arelimited, and there are many more candidates competing with him to grab theseopportunities. He believes that if his potential recruiters get an impression that hehas not worked hard on his CV to give an impression of an active subject, theymay not hire him. Therefore, Hari alludes to a sense of insecurity that is specific tohis location as a Third World market subject. The threat of becoming different frompeers by not being able to find a high paying job creates a further fear of losing out andof becoming abnormal in the setting. Madhabi reported, there is an element of fear.[Although I didnt like the idea], I worked on the CV because I was worried that all of

them would get jobs and I would not have one. Madhabi was a reluctant participantin the CV development process, but could not resist the market subjectivity becauseof the fear of being labelled as an abnormal person and of losing out on the gains.


13/24


Dilip further explains the process of normalisation and the problem of being labelledas abnormal or someone with a problem:

I have seen students crying when they move to slot 1.5 or 2. It is humiliating todress up every day and to come for placements, when you dont get an offer. . . .Your complete identity in the campus is decided on the basis of your placement.Even if you are IR1 or IR2 (Institute Rank 1 or 2 based on academic performance),if you dont get a job in slot 0 or 1, you are looked upon as someone with aproblem.

Dilip refers to the placement process that is conducted by slotting recruiting firmsinto different rank-ordered slots (Slots 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2). The Slot 0 firms areinvariably the highest paying recruiters that primarily include investment banks andconsultancies and are the first to get a chance to interview students. This is followedby firms in the other managerial domains that pay lower salaries and are allottedsubsequent recruitment slots. The annual salaries offered by these firms vary from

an average of seven million INR in Slot 0 to around one million INR in Slot 2.Moreover, Dilip reports that an inability to get a top job creates enormous peerpressure on students. Dilip further elaborated on the pressure to conform:

I wanted to do research on a social crisis [real project name disguised to maintainanonymity] and to opt out of summer placements. When I told seniors, PlacementReps came and met me and tried to convince me against it as if this was a crimeor a sin . . . I said I want to explore. I had around 20 sessions with seniors anddifferent seniors had the same message that you should not go for this research.The kind of peer pressure you face till you get into internship is phenomenal . . .I finally decided to go for it [research on a social crisis].

Dilips decision to opt out of the summer placement process was considered anabnormal act inconsistent with neoliberal governmentality and other students madeattempts to discipline his behaviour. There was pathologisation of Dilips conductand other students counselled him hoping to check his abnormal behaviour. It isthe disciplinary power inherent to the summer placement process that pathologisesDilips behaviour by revealing a gap between his position (doing research on a socialcrisis) and the idealised norm (summer placement with a large private corporation).Furthermore, Dilips act of deviation from the norm is seen as a confession thatseniors, who perform the role of pastors, act upon in an attempt to reform him.

In the above narratives, participants also refer to several other important aspects

of the prevalent governmentality and its associated power/knowledge practices thatfoster market subjectivity. The governmental process begins with a three tieredinteraction process between the two batches. First, within a few days of entering theprogramme, the first-year students are initiated into the student community throughan informal ritual, referred to as rang. In a highly dramatised make-believe sequenceof events, the first years are informed by the second-year students about a lucrativesummer job offer for which they all have to compete. The ritual lasts for a few dayswhen students prepare to compete, submit CVs, and meet seniors. At the end ofthe ritual the first years are assembled in one of the hostel courtyards and dunkedin water. This is followed by intensive sessions on placements or the cruises that

are organised by the second-year students. As disciplinary practices these reveal tothe newcomers what is normal and what is abnormal and thus foster a processof normalisation. The third part of the process is assignment of CV mentors, a


14/24


pastoral practice employed to guide first-year students to make their CVs. Second-year students who have interned with the top recruiters are generally chosen as CVmentors. In the third part it is common to see students working on their CVs and intaking feedback and advice from scores of seniors. Madhabi reported:

CV mentorship is a tradition here. Every senior is sharing gyan [knowledge aboutCV]. Everyone is talking about their experiences in summer internships. It is moreof now I know and bacchas (children) listen to me. . . . you will see a group [year Istudents] going from hostel to hostel from one supposed expert to another [yearII students].

This process of guidance by seniors through pastoral and disciplinary power isfacilitated by the residential campus in which all students reside in close proximitywith each other in hostels. A close physical proximity ensures that students are inclose contact with each other throughout their MBA programme. This residentialarrangement facilitates the mentorship process and as Madhabi says, makes it

common for junior students to visit their seniors at odd hours. The governmentalprocess is closely monitored and controlled by the Placement Representatives,who are second-year students and play a key role in liaising between prospectiveemployers and first-year students. The residential arrangement means that studentsare under a constant gaze of seniors and are like inmates of a panopticon who areexpected to be reformed through a process of surveillance. Dilip described the roleof placement representative as follows:

You can miss an [academic] assignment. But you cannot miss a placementdeadline. Placement Reps are the most powerful people. . . . .placement repshave the right to levy fines which they do . . . you are fined for coming late. . . . thekind of authority they have, they can go to the extent of saying that they can spoilyour career!

According to Dilip, placement representatives play the role of pastors guiding anddisciplining the first-year students and cruises are like clinics in which correctivemeasures are taken to nurture market subjects. The governmental process sometimesinvolves use of sovereign power in the forms of fines, exclusion, and scolding bythese representatives, but is largely driven by a more seamless form of power throughwhich market subjects are developed (Foucault, 2007; Rose, 1999).

In summary, we found that discourses of peer pressure, competition, and

pathologisation contribute to market subjectivity in the business school. Studentswho enter the school are actively guided and monitored by their seniors throughdeployment of disciplinary and pastoral power apparatuses. Deviations from thedominant subjective position will not only result in pathologisation, but also in losingout to the multitude of competing candidates in their Third World setting.

Discourses of uncritical pedagogy and elitist policies

Some students believe that the business school teaching is uncritically supportive ofprivate corporations. These students attribute the prevalent market subjectivity to the

pedagogical discourses that are predominantly supportive of neoliberal rationalityand profit-making. Arup, who considers himself a leftist and ideologically differentfrom most of the fellow students reported:


15/24


My problem is that only one view is presented in class rooms. For example, ineconomics primarily the neoclassical view is presented. I wish more sides werepresented. In marketing, there are sessions on Critical Marketing, but only twosessions are devoted to it. There can be more of it.

Arup complains that he feels ideologically isolated in the programme and is a lonevoice of dissent in the student community against market subjectivity. He believesthat critical theories are grossly under-emphasised in the lectures. Dilip, who wasanother dissenting voice in the student community, agrees with Arup. Dilip partlyattributes market subjectivity to managerial discourses prevalent in classes that justifyand legitimise corporate behaviour. Dilip, who resisted neoliberal governmentalityby refusing to participate in the summer placement process, believes that such formsof resistances are rare because monocultures are created by uncritical pedagogicalprocesses in the business school.

Another discourse that contributes to the construction of market subjectivity is

on elitist school policies on the issues of fees and admissions. In recent years, thebusiness school has increased its fees for the MBA programme by several hundredsof thousands of rupees. This change is partly a result of the neoliberal frameworkof governance under which the state funding to the school has been minimised. Thebusiness school has to raise its own funds to meet its budgetary requirements and haschosen to increase the fees to achieve this objective. Although most of the studentsbelong to middle or higher classes, they do not have the necessary savings to pay thefees and nearly 95% take loans to pay their tuition fees of 1.3 million INR. Thesestudents informed us that repayments of loans are dependent on their abilities tomaximise their returns from the programme. Rajat, who has taken a loan of aroundone million INR reported, there is a general sense of fear [that] EMI [EquatedMonthly Instalment] would come to around 25000 INR [and] staying in Mumbaiand with salaries in the lower range, you are left with nothing. Rajat believes thatlarge loans force students to conform to the market forces. He realises that the costof living in the large Indian cities, where most of the corporations are located, isquite high and needs to be supported by high salaries. Over the last century, privatecorporations have spread unevenly to create a large core around urban metropolisessuch as Mumbai with a vast peripheral space comprising villages, towns, and smallcities. It becomes inevitable for the students aspiring for corporate careers to shiftto these large metropolises. This movement has increased the cost of living quitesubstantially in large cities in India over the last few decades. And, in spite of his

ideological leanings, Arup laments: I have taken a loan of 0.9 Million Rupees andmy EMI will work out to INR 18000. This means that I cannot join an NGO (NonGovernmental Organisation in the Social Sector) for the first few years.

Thus, Arup believes that an elitist policy of high fees forces him to comply withthe dominant market logic. Another factor that contributes to the governmentaldiscourse and a broad consensus around market subjectivity is the nature of studentpopulation. Most of the students who enter the MBA program are from middle orhigher income groups. Given that very few students from poorer sections of thecommunity, who constitute nearly 85% of the countrys population (Patnaik, 2007),make it to the business school, elitism becomes an important aspect of the discourse

in the setting. An emphasis on English language in the entrance test is an obstacle forless privileged students and restricts their access to the business school. Dilip suggeststhat:


16/24


The whole idea of having the entrance exam in English [is flawed]. How manyspeak English in this country? If this exam was in Hindi, I would have cleared itafter my class ten . . . many students spent 23 years in trying to figure out how totackle this monster of English. In elite and upper middle class, families interactin English, but among lower middle class and middle class no one speaks in

English . . . you dont have the same understanding of English.

Dilip believes that privileged students enter the business school and create a culture ofelitism. He suggests that a 10th class student is likely to have the required quantitativeand analytical skills to do well in the test, but an emphasis on English language makesit difficult for lower middle class students like him to clear the entrance exam. Hefurther argues that the privileges enjoyed by the elite groups help them to becomemore active subjects and to make use of the opportunities presented by the neoliberalorder. These advantages further reinforce the market subjectivity of students.

In summary, we found that several discourses contribute to market subjectivityin the business school. The discourses of disciplining by second-year students,fear of abnormality, uncritical pedagogy, and elitist policies foster neoliberalgovernmentality.

Problematic consequences of market subjectivity

Market subjectivity in the setting leads to several outcomes that include a prevalenceof instrumental approach, disregard for academic learning, and neglect of socialconcerns. We analyse these issues under the three sub-themes of Instrumental Approach and Commodification of Knowledge, Neglect of Social Concerns, andDisenchantment and Exclusion. These sub-themes help us to understand the problems

associated with market subjectivity in the business school.

Instrumental approach and commodification of knowledge

We found that academic and non-academic activities were primarily driven bydiscourses of maximisation of returns. This approach feeds on the important roleplayed by CVs in the lives of our student participants and Hitesh reported:

At IIT Delhi [an undergrad school], in the first three years, I did not even knowwhat a CV was. Here you will not take part in a competition if you are not going to

get CV points. At IIT, I did things because I liked them.

Hitesh contrasts his current experience with that in his undergraduate school andreports that in the business school, activities are primarily driven by their saleabilitythrough CVs. Ashok further mentioned that extra-curricular activities in the businessschool were also determined by their market value, there are several clubs oncampus. The main motive is CV point for joining these clubs . . . you also get intoclubs so that seniors know you.

Students realise that the emphasis on jobs was detrimental for the academicprocesses. Hitesh candidly suggested:

The focus is on marks. The learning part is not important here . . . the key partis placement which is based on CG [cumulative grades]. You need grades to getshortlisted and that is why grades are important.


17/24


18/24


Preranas interpretation of farmer suicides appears to be very different from thatof experts on Indian agriculture, who attribute these suicides to an agrarian crisisand a rise in rural poverty (e.g., Sainath, 2010). Prerana displays a strong neoliberalrationality by suggesting that anyone who is active and entrepreneurial can do well inlife. She herself came from a lower-middle-class background and firmly believed thatas a result of hard work she could do well in life. Prerana refused to acknowledge theroles of structural constraints for the less privileged sections of the Indian population.This was particularly glaring because of the high levels of poverty in the country.This insensitivity was an outcome of a governmentality that disciplined its subjects tofollow market forces.

In summary, we found that students as market subjects gave priority to their gainsand uncritically celebrated neoliberalism. This led to a neglect of social concerns anddisregard for vast socio-economic inequities in Indian society.

Disenchantment and exclusionSome students become disenchanted and feel excluded from processes that arestrongly influenced by neoliberal rationality. Himesh told us, the first month wasspent in the rang. I hated it. It was demeaning. Another student Aritra, whogot a job on the last day of summer placements, informed us, placements were atrauma for me. This form of discomfort was particularly evident among studentswho were socially more sensitive, and Madhabi informed us, Students are notinterested (in learning). I get very frustrated with it . . . I also cry at times. Madhabisfrustration with the place was particularly noteworthy because she otherwise enjoyedthe academic processes and had done well to get an investment bank summer job. She

felt isolated and was forced to comply with the neoliberal rationality. Dilip who couldresist the pressure more strongly admitted that even he had to attend the placementcruises.

These marketisation processes also have a detrimental impact of excluding theabnormal individuals who are not able to become sufficiently entrepreneurial andactive. Shaymal, who is from a lower middle class family, described the followingexperience of his exclusion:

I put in some effort towards CV writing I realised later that I failed to meetpeople. When placement goes on, several shortlists come out. I did not get anyextended shortlists [although] I had a good CG in the first term.

Shyamal attributes his exclusion from the placement process to his inability to activelymeet with seniors and to his inability to create a CV that would help him sell himselfin the job market. Shyamal had graduated from one of the top engineering schoolsin the country and had good grades. However, he failed to do well because of hisshortcomings as a neoliberal subject.

In summary, our findings show that neoliberal governmentality is prevalent inthe business school and nurtures market subjects. Market subjectivity is driven by arationality of active selling in the job market and through maximisation of monetarygains. The discourses of disciplining by seniors, competition, pathologisation,

uncritical pedagogy, and elitist policies contribute to the governmentality. Marketsubjectivity results in a neglect of academic processes, subordination of socialconcerns, and disenchantment among some students.


19/24


Discussion and conclusions

This article investigates student behaviour in a business school in India and offers anunderstanding of a marketisation process. We deploy Foucaults conceptualisationof governmentality and add to extant understanding of student behaviour and

marketisation of higher education in several important ways. We uncover a processin a Third World country through which market subjectivity is nurtured amongstudents as they strive to become responsible, active, and entrepreneurial subjects.We trace the subject position to several governmental discourses, some of whichare unique to the Indian context, that prevail in the business school. In thecreation of market subjectivity, we also uncover the roles of pastoral and disciplinarypower in conjunction with self-governance. Furthermore, we critically analyse theconsequences of market subjectivity among students and offer insights into itsdetrimental impact on student learning, well-being, and social sensitivity that helpto understand the marketisation process in higher education in the Third World.

Our study of student behaviour illustrates how student subjectivity is shaped byneoliberal governmentality. The state-centred model of government and sovereignnotions of power cannot account for the process. Rather, the process ofgovernmentality is premised upon neoliberal subject positions. Our data show thatas market subjects, students strive to become active, entrepreneurial, and responsibleindividuals. A key to this process is the development of an individualistic or egoisticorientation towards society and a fixation for monetary gains. These market subjectsoverlook social issues and altruistic enterprises (see also Lowrie & Willmott, 2009).Thus, neoliberal governmentality creates a close entanglement between rationalitiesof governance of individuals and governance of markets.

Several studies on marketisation of higher education have used the frameworkof governmentality (e.g., Bragg, 2007; Marginson, 1997). However, most of thesestudies have either examined broader shifts in university policies due to marketisationor focused on subjective positions resulting from pedagogical processes. Our focuson student behaviour in a Third World setting offers some unique insights that havebeen overlooked in studies of marketisation. Our findings suggest that the processof subjectification is enforced through the employment of disciplinary and pastoralpractices of senior students. The practices along with the discourse of peer pressureprovide opportunities for students to control each other. Through individual trainingand discussions at mentoring programmes, students are given opportunities to confesstheir thoughts about their future careers to fellow students. Such avowals are

interpreted against the backdrop of neoliberal governmentality. Thus, if the confessoravows that she is opting for a career not in line with neoliberal governmentality, suchas taking a job with an NGO, it is strongly discouraged by peers. Our findings suggestthat seniors take the role as pastors, guiding and leading their juniors towardsneoliberal subjectivity. In addition to pastoral practices, disciplinary practices arealso employed. In the placement sessions, CV-writing training, and in inductionprogrammes, normal and abnormal are defined by the neoliberal context. Thus, aneoliberal discourse is given a privileged position and becomes the norm throughwhich disciplinary processes are deployed. It must be further noted that disciplinaryand pastoral practices not only control people externally, they also facilitate self-

government. When students avow deviation from neoliberal governmentality orwhen they engage in disciplinary practices of education, the strength of the normbecomes evident to them and is gradually internalised.


20/24


Our findings further show that the physical proximity of students in the settingcontributes to the governmentality process. The residential school becomes agated community that is insulated and removed from the Third World realitiesof poverty and hunger for its more elite students. The students who residetogether are continuously exposed to neoliberal discourse that fosters market

subjectivity. This process again works through both self-governance and discipliningof students. A continuous exposure to the norms contributes to their internalisationand acceptance by students. The physical proximity of students also creates astronger disciplinary gaze through which the business school is converted intosomething resembling a panopticon in which students as inmates are under acontinuous surveillance (cf. Foucault, 1977). Thus, in identifying the significance ofthe residential campus as a gated community we further contribute to the extantunderstanding of the marketisation of higher education in a Third World society.

Our findings further show that a discourse of elitist policies contributes to marketsubjectivity. We found that high fees that resulted from neoliberal policies of the state

create a situation of student borrowing which in turn contributes to a discourse ofgreater dependence on market forces for returns. Thus, such a policy shift crowdsout alternate subjective positions and strengthens neoliberal rationality. Similarly,our findings show that some students believe that the entrance exam is elitist inemphasising English language and allows more privileged groups to gain entry intothe setting. Our data show that an emphasis on English filters out students frompoorer backgrounds and creates elitism in the business school. This elitism furthersthe marketisation of education. Thus, unlike some other findings on marketisationof education (e.g., Lynch, 2006), we find that elitism is not merely an outcomeof marketisation, but can also contribute to it. This process furthers a neoliberalrationality that is perceived to be exclusive because it allows already privilegedstudents to become active and entrepreneurial in the Indian context. These discursiveelements and social practices are particular to the context of a highly stratified Indiansociety that is experiencing a further increase in socio-economic inequities in the lasttwo decades of neoliberalism.

Market subjectivity of the students examined by us is not completely free ofother subjective positions and shows that effects of neoliberal governmentality haveto be contextualised (see Yokoyama, 2008). We found that students show a strongpreference for multinational recruiters who offer jobs in the West with high dollardenominated salaries. In this discourse, market subjectivity merges with postcolonialsubjectivity to produce Third World elitism (see Bhabha, 1994; Varman & Saha,

2009). Some postcolonial theorists have suggested that the colonised may show anurge to denigrate their own national institutions and to imitate the colonisers, who inour context are broadly equated with the people and institutions in the West (Bhabha,1994; Fanon, 1952; Nandy, 1981). Our data show that some of the largest of theIndian corporations are considered less efficient and lagging behind the Westerncorporations. Moreover, students consider it more prestigious to work for the First-World corporations and to be like their erstwhile colonial masters who manage thesebusinesses. The emphasis on English in higher education is also unique to postcolonialIndia. The language is a vestige of British colonialism in the country and continuesto determine the appropriateness of candidates for the business school. As explained

above, in the Indian context English language also represents a privileged status ofits speaker. Thus, the emphasis on the language continues to foster a subject who isnot only advantaged and market oriented, but is also a product of Indias colonial


21/24


legacy. These postcolonial aspects of market subjectivity of our participants furthermake our study unique and add to the other accounts of neoliberal governmentalityin higher education.

Our data show that market subjectivity is resisted by a few. Resistance stems froma sense of disenchantment and exclusion from market forces. Some of the resisting

students consider themselves on the left in their political leanings and aspire to besocial activists. They interpret the social world by drawing on alternative discourses toneoliberalism. Others, especially those who come from less privileged backgrounds,are unable to become active enough to follow the neoliberal doctrine. These twogroups are labelled as abnormal in the setting. There is a pathologisation of suchabnormal students, who are then made to go through correctional processes (seealso Nadesan, 2006). In a study of marketisation of higher education, Peters (2005)argued that a new morality may be created through the process of responsibilisationunder neoliberalism. However, based on our findings in the Indian context, weare less optimistic about such an outcome (see also OMalley, 1992). Some of our

participants believed that instead of ethical self-constitution as market subjects,neoliberal governmentality encouraged students to become unethical in their conduct(cf. Peters, 2005).

We witnessed a widespread neglect of academic processes and prevalence ofinstrumental rationality among our market subjects. These findings closely resonatewith the critical literature on the marketisation of higher education (e.g., Lynch,2006; Molesworth et al., 2009). We further show that responsibilisation of aneoliberal subject is limited to maximisation of gains in a marketplace and does notnecessarily include a quest for a critical academic perspective (cf. Peters, 2005). Thisanalysis further helps to explain a declining academic interest among MBA studentsthat has been widely reported (see Datar et al., 2010).

Summing up, this research has offered an understanding of student behaviouras it is influenced by marketisation under neoliberalism in a Third World country.Our research raises several questions that future marketing scholarship can address,including how academic institutions can break free from neoliberal governmentalityand create alternate subject positions which are more attuned to a critical perspective.Another issue of significance is to understand the role of critical pedagogy in creatinggreater resistance to neoliberal rationality among students. Some of the answers tothese questions will help in creating a more liberated subject who will be responsibletowards themself and the society around them.

References

All India Council for Technical Education. (n.d.). Institutions management. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aicte-india.org/postginstmanagement.htm

Atkinson, P., & Hammersley, Martin (1998). Ethnography and participant observation. In N.K.Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 111136). London: Sage.

Basu, S. (2010, March 10). IIM-C grad bags Rs 1.6cr offer. The Times of India.Retrieved from http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-03-10/kolkata/28117159_1_management-calcutta-iim-c-placement-process

Bertelsen, E. (2008). The real transformation: the marketisation of higher education. SocialDynamics, 24(2), 130158.

Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.
http://www.aicte-india.org/postginstmanagement.htmhttp://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-03-10/kolkata/28117159_http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-03-10/kolkata/28117159_http://www.aicte-india.org/postginstmanagement.htm


22/24


Bragg, S. (2007). Student voice and governmentality: the production of enterprising subject.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28(3), 343355.

Bowen, S. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. QualitativeResearch, 8(1), 137152.

Business Standard. (2011, April 21). IIM-C sees Rs 2.2-lakh rise in average salary. Business

Standard. Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iim-c-sees-rs-22-lakh-rise-in-average-salary-/433040/Chandra, N. K. (2010). Inclusive growth in neoliberal India: A faade. Economic and Political

Weekly, 45(8), 4356.Chandrashekhar, C.P. & Ghosh, J. (2000). The market that failed. New Delhi: Leftword.Clegg, S.R., Courpasson, D. & Phillips, N. (2006). Power and organizations. London: Sage.Cochoy, F. (1998). Another discipline for the market economy: marketing as a performative

knowledge and know-how for capitalism. In M. Callon (Ed.), The laws of the market(pp. 194221). Oxford: Blackwell.

Covaleski, M.A., Dirsmith, M.W., Heian, B.H., & Samuel, S. (1998). The calculated and theavowed: techniques of discipline and struggles over identity in big six public accountingfirms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 293327.

Datar, S. M., Garvin, D. A., & Cullen, P. G. (2010). Rethinking the MBA: business educationat a crossroads. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Dean, M. (1995). Governing the unemployed self in an active society. Economy and Society,24(4), 559583.

Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality: power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.Dean, M. (2007). Governing societies: political perspectives on domestic and international rule.

New York: Open University Press.Deleuze, G. (1988). Foucault (S. Hand, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Du Gay, P. (1996). Consumption and identity at work. London: Sage.Du Gay, P. (2000). Enterprise and its futures: a response to Fournier and Grey. Organization,

7(1), 165183.

Erlandson, D.A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L. & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry:a guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Fanon, F. (1952). Black skin, white masks. New York: Grove Press.Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. London: Penguin.Foucault, M. (1981). The will to knowledge: the history of sexuality (Vol. 1). London: Penguin.Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: lectures at Collge de France 19771978.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: lectures at Collge de France 19781979.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.Gabriel, Y. & Lang, T. (1995). The unmanageable consumer. London: Sage.Gibbs, P. (2001). Higher education as a market: a problem or solution. Studies in Higher

Education, 26(1), 8594.Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative

research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.Gross, M. & Hogler, R. (2005). What the shadow knows: exploring the hidden dimensions

of the consumer metaphor in management education. Journal of Management Education,29(3), 316.

Hemsley-Brown, J. & Oplatka, I. (2006). Universities in a competitive global marketplace: asystematic review of the literature on higher education in marketing. International Journalof Public Sector Management, 19(4), 316338.

Jongbloed, B. (2003). Marketisation in higher education, Clarks triangle and the essentialingredients of markets. Higher Education Quarterly, 57(2), 110135.

Kurien, C.T. (1995). Aspects of Indias economy. New Delhi: Orient Longman.Laclau, E., and Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: towards a radicaldemocratic politics (2nd ed.). New York: Verso.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iim-c-sees-rs-22-lakh-rise-in-average-salary-/433040http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iim-c-sees-rs-22-lakh-rise-in-average-salary-/433040http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iim-c-sees-rs-22-lakh-rise-in-average-salary-/433040http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iim-c-sees-rs-22-lakh-rise-in-average-salary-/433040


23/24


Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Lowrie, A. (2008). The relevance of aggression and the aggression of relevance: the rise of theaccreditation marketing machine. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(4),352364.

Lowrie, A. & Willmott, H. (2009). Accreditation sickness in the consumption of businesseducation: the vacuum in the AACSB standard setting. Management Learning, 40(4),411420.

Lynch, K. (2006). Neo-liberalism and marketisation: the implications for higher education.European Educational Research Journal, 5(1), 117.

Marginson, S. (1997). Steering from a distance: power relations in Australian higher education.Higher Education, 34, 6380.

Marshall, J. D. (2004). Foucault and neo-liberalism: biopower and Busno-power. Retrievedfrom http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/95_docs/marshall.html

MBA Universe. (2010, May 7). MBA placement 2010 key recruiters at top MBA institutes.Retrieved May 27, 2011 from http://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211

Molesworth, M., Nixon, E. & Scullion, R. (2009). Having, being and higher education:the marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into consumer.Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 277287.

Nadesan, M. (2006). The MYD panopticon: neo-liberalism, governmentality andeducation. Radical Pedagogy. Retrieved from http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue8_1/nadesan.html

Nandy, A. (1981). The intimate enemy: loss and recovery of self under colonialism. New Delhi:Oxford.

Neu, D. & Quantanilla, C. (2008). Market discipline and management education: a view froma southern womens cooperative. Journal of Management Education, 32(6), 697715.

OMalley, P. (1992). Risk, power and crime prevention. Economy & Society, 21(3), 252275.Palety, P. (2009, March 22). Student worries: loan repayments, fake job offers. LiveMint.com.

Retrieved from http://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.html

Pathak, K. (2007, January 4). IIMs foreign offers to double this season. BusinessStandard.Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220/.

Patnaik, U. (2007). Neoliberalism and rural poverty in India. Economic and Political Weekly,42(3), 31323150.

Patnaik, P. (2006). The state under neo-liberalism. Retrieved April 10, 2007 from http://www.macroscan.com/fet/oct06/pdf/Neo_liberalism.pdf

Peters, M. A. (2005). The new prudentialism in education: actuarial rationality and theentrepreneurial self. Educational Theory, 55(2), 123137.

Phillips, L. & Jrgensen, M.W. (2002).Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.Rose, N. (1993). Government, authority and expertise in advanced liberalism. Economy &

Society, 22(3), 283299.Rose, N. (1999). Powers of freedom: reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Sainath, P. (2010, January 22). Nearly 2 lakh farm suicides since 1997. The Hindu. Retrieved

from http://www.hindu.com/2010/01/22/stories/2010012258950100.htmSkln, P. (2009). Service marketing and subjectivity: the shaping of customer-oriented

proactive employees. Journal of Marketing Management, 25(78), 795809.Skln, P. (2010). Managing service firms: the power of managerial marketing. London:

Routledge.

Skln, P., Fougre, M. & Fellesson, M. (2008). Marketing discourse: a critical perspective.London: Routledge.Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage.
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/95_docs/marshall.htmlhttp://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/contenthttp://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.htmlhttp://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.htmlhttp://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www/http://www.hindu.com/2010/01/22/stories/2010012258950100.htmhttp://www.hindu.com/2010/01/22/stories/2010012258950100.htmhttp://www/http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/iims-foreign-offers-to-double-this-season/270220http://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.htmlhttp://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.htmlhttp://www.livemint.com/2009/03/22221852/Student-worries-loan-repaymen.htmlhttp://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/contenthttp://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://www.mbauniverse.com/article.php?id=3211http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/95_docs/marshall.html


24/24


Varman, R. and Saha, B. (2009). Disciplining the discipline: understanding postcolonialepistemic ideology in marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 25(7/8), 811824.

Wadhwa, K. (2010, October 12). Wary of placements, 15% fewer applicants for CAT.Hindustan Times. Retrieved from http://www.hindustantimes.com/Wary-of-placements-15-fewer-applicants-for-CAT/Article1-611652.aspx.

Yokoyama, K. (2008). Neo-liberal governmentality in the English and Japanese highereducation. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 18(3), 231247.Zizek, S. (2000). The ticklish subject: the absent centre of political ontology. London: Verso.

About the authors

Rohit Varman is Associate Professor at Indian Institute of Management Calcutta. His researchinterests are broadly in the domains of critical marketing and consumer culture theory.He has conducted research on subaltern consumption, anti-consumption, embedded marketexchanges, and postcolonial identity.

Corresponding author: Rohit Varman, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Kolkata,WB India 700 104

T +91 33 24678300/06E [email protected]

Biswatosh Saha is Associate Professor at Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta. Hisresearch interests are broadly in the fields of institutional theory, innovation and knowledgenetworks, and law and regulation.

E [email protected]

Per Skln is Professor of Business Administration at Service Research Centre, Karlstad

University, Sweden. His research interests are broadly in the domains of critical marketing,service marketing, and marketing-as-practice. His latest books are Managing service firms:the power of managerial marketing (Routledge, 2010) and Marketing discourse: A criticalperspective (Routledge, 2008).

E [email protected]
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Wary-of-placements-15-fewer-applicants-for-CAT/Article1-611652.aspxhttp://www.hindustantimes.com/Wary-of-placements-15-fewer-applicants-for-CAT/Article1-611652.aspxmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.hindustantimes.com/Wary-of-placements-15-fewer-applicants-for-CAT/Article1-611652.aspxhttp://www.hindustantimes.com/Wary-of-placements-15-fewer-applicants-for-CAT/Article1-611652.aspx

Documents

Varman Et Al JMM 2011