In this article we respond to Cabantous, Gond, Harding and Learmonth's critique of recent conceptual contributions that employ the concept of performativity for prompting progressive changes in organizations. All in all, we seem to share the general unease concerning the marginal impact of Critical Management Studies on re-defining organizational realities. At the same time, we largely disagree on how critical scholars could support effective, progressive changes. In this rejoinder we respond to but also absorb Cabantous et al.'s critique of progressive performativity and sketch three ways of how to advance discussions of Critical Management Studies' role in organizational scholarship.Keywords critical management studies, critical performativity theory, engaged critical research, progressive performativity, relevance of critical research It is with great interest that we read the essay of Cabantous, Gond, Harding and Learmonth (Cabantous et al., 2015) in which the authors present a substantial and fine-grained critique of recent contributions focused on the notion of critical performativity in Critical