Temporal Governance in Neoliberal Bureaucracies: Deadlines, Delays, and the Politics of Time
This article explores the complex temporal management of neoliberal bureaucracies, examining how time—through deadlines, delays, and scheduling—functions as a political and regulatory instrument. Drawing on theories of governmentality, biopolitics, and the sociology of time, it argues that temporal governance disciplines behaviour, structures institutional processes, and produces both efficiency and inequality. Through case studies in public administration, healthcare, and welfare systems, the paper demonstrates how temporal mechanisms shape power relations, distribute resources, and generate differential social outcomes, while also opening spaces for resistance and reform.
Temporal Governance, Neoliberal Bureaucracy, Deadlines, Delays, Time Discipline, Bureaucratic Authority, Politics of Time, Governmentality, Institutional Temporality
[1] Thompson, E. P. (1967). Time, work-discipline, and industrial capitalism. Past & Present, 38, 56–97.
[2] Adam, B. (1990). Time and social theory. Polity Press.
[3] Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In Burchell, G., Gordon, C., & Miller, P. (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). University of Chicago Press.
[4] Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–78. Palgrave Macmillan.
[5] Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford University Press.
[6] Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2011). Audit culture revisited: Rankings, ratings, and the reassembling of governance. Current Anthropology, 52(S3), S111–S122.
[7] Ball, S. J. (2012). Global education policy and management: The audit, standards, and performativity. Routledge.
[8] Ezzamel, M., & Willmott, H. (1998). Accounting for teamwork: A critical study of group-based systems of organizational control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(2), 276–314.
[9] Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (2nd ed.). Verso.
[10] Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis—into the age of austerity (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
[11] Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 13–47.
[12] Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Stanford University Press.
[13] Green, F., & Heywood, J. (2012). Performance pays and worker motivation in the public sector: Evidence from the UK. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(3), 597–622.
[14] Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
[15] Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
[16] Hochschild, A. R. (2012). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
[17] Ezzamel, M., Robson, K., & Stapleton, P. (2012). Accounting and time: Understanding the temporal dynamics of organizational control. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(8), 551–569.
[18] Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. S. (2004). Accounting for flexibility and efficiency: A field study of management control systems in a retail organization. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(2), 271–301.
[19] O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2016). Sustainability accounting and accountability. Routledge.
[20] Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioural Scientist, 43(3), 377–391.