Sur le panoptisme de Jeremy Bentham

The panopticon, an emblematic concept in management and organization studies: Heaven or hell?

“…In line with an emerging trend in parallel disciplines (e.g. law, language studies, information security) that recognize the larger value of the panopticon (Brunon‐Ernst, 2013a, 2013b; Galic et al., 2016; Tusseau, 2004), we revisited Bentham's project of a democratic government and its elaboration in Foucault's (2008) theorizations on governmentality. In this end, this investigation, combined with our in‐depth literature review, leads us to specify two main readings of the panopticon: on the one hand, we identify a dominant first reading , inspired by Foucault's (1977) interpretation of the Benthamian prison design, which conceptualizes the panopticon as a dispositive of surveillance and control, from which some studies wish to depart; on the other hand, we suggest a second reading of the panopticon, relying on Bentham's initial project, which implies an alternative and richer conceptualization of the panopticon that could inform further MOS research.…”

“…Despite such variations, however, the premise of both panoptic and post‐panoptic studies is based on Foucauldian theorizing to analyse how modern organizations have organized power relations to control people, materially or symbolically, and produce docile bodies. With few exceptions (in the field of information security and piracy, see Galic et al., 2016; in law and political sciences, see Tusseau, 2004), the same old song has been sung again and again, interpreting and constituting the panopticon as the (almost) perfect surveillance artefact and ultimate metaphor of control in modern organizations.…”

“…This first reading of the panopticon, popularized by Foucault (1977), has contributed to extend the traditional vision of its founding father, Bentham, often presented and stigmatized as the promoter of a mercantile and authoritarian philosophy. Bentham's doctrine is often criticized for reflecting a pathological obsession with absolute social control that neglects the integrity, freedom and agency of the human person (Tusseau, 2004). According to Foucault (1977), the panoptic principle acts directly on the minds of people, through self‐discipline and normation.…”

“…We develop another interpretation, which we label a second reading of the panopticon stemming from Bentham's philosophy. The ‘Panopticon Writings’ is a series of letters written in 1786 and two ‘postscripts’ written in 1790 and 1791 (Tusseau, 2004), in which Bentham develops a programme on ‘Democracy and Information’ 1 . The panopticon is, for Bentham (1995/2010), a ‘political project’; it is both a carceral and a constitutional agencement, whose initial theorization must be put in the context of England at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries.…”

“…Then, following the London‐based Bentham initiative (Brunon‐Ernst, 2013a) and a recent trend in parallel disciplines (law, language studies and information security) that have begun to recognize the larger value of the panopticon, we revisit Bentham's (1995/2010, 1997) writings to understand his original project, which entails four types of panopticons. We build on Bentham's project about the development of a liberal mode of government, further developed in Foucault's (2008) theorizations on governmentality (Brunon‐Ernst, 2013a, 2013b; Galic et al., 2016; Tusseau, 2004), to propose a more comprehensive conceptualization of the panopticon. In sharp contrast with the first, common reading of the panopticon, we suggest a second reading as: (1) a rewarding functional dispositive based on freedom and autonomy ( form ); (2) relying on the principle of information sharing, transparency and visibility ( principle ); and (3) striving for harmony and efficiency as ultimate ends ( goal ).…”