A Day in the Life of Procedural Excellence
SCENE I: THE WELCOME EMAIL
Subject: “Welcome Back, Esteemed Knowledge Workers (or Readers of Emails)”
Content excerpt:
“As per standard operating protocol, please acknowledge receipt of this email within 12 hours.
Failure to do so will trigger an automated escalation, including but not limited to:
Calendar audits
Sentiment analysis of your inbox
Follow-up with your departmental wellness officer”
Note: “Welcome” is under review for potentially implying a pre-existing sense of belonging.
SCENE II: THE DEPARTMENT MEETING
Attendees:
All staff and PhD students, each behind a nameplate displaying:
-
full name
-
pronouns
-
research identity
-
positionality statement (condensed to 12 words)
Agenda:
-
Review the minutes of the last meeting (from last week, delayed by 3 days due to email backlog)
-
Discuss the establishment of a subcommittee to study subcommittees
-
Vote on whether to vote in future meetings
Procedural note:
Every comment must be phrased as a question, even if it is a statement.
SCENE III: THE RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATION
Title: “Ethical Implications of the Epistemic Hierarchies in Multisystemic Knowledge Production”
-
Length: 64 pages (excluding references, references not required for page count)
-
Footnotes: obligatory, self-citing, and double-checked for performative erudition
-
Outcome: success measured not by knowledge produced, but by number of institutional forms correctly submitted
Reviewer comment:
“Innovative. Please reframe in more inclusive language; add at least three more buzzwords.”
SCENE IV: THE TEACHING EVALUATION
Students asked to rate the course using a scale that is itself under review for intersectional bias.
-
0 = Radically oppressive
-
5 = Uncomfortably neutral
-
10 = Ethically impeccable
Note: Comments must reference either climate justice, decolonisation, or emotional labour—or risk being flagged for irrelevance.
SCENE V: THE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES
Meeting convened to examine the necessity of the committee itself.
-
Recommendations:
-
Form a subcommittee to evaluate redundancy
-
Circulate a survey about “how meaningful our discussions feel”
-
Publish a 12-point policy on procedural integrity
-
Minutes are longer than the meeting.
SCENE VI: THE LIBRARY
Students come to borrow books.
-
Each book has been reclassified multiple times:
-
“Critical Theory → Speculative Humanities → Ethical Interventions”
-
-
Borrowing requires approval from:
-
Librarian
-
Subject specialist
-
Ethics review panel
-
Your nearest peer mentor
-
Optional: A tutorial on the performativity of citation practices.
SCENE VII: THE END-OF-DAY EMAILS
“Reminder: Please submit your time logs, workflow reflection, and emotional labour assessment by 5pm.
Non-compliance may be considered ‘unethical engagement with the academic ecosystem.’”
Staff sigh. PhD students nod solemnly.
FINAL NOTE
At the University of Optimised Compliance:
-
Bureaucracy is celebrated as a research output
-
Procedures replace pedagogy
-
Virtue signalling counts as service
-
Nothing is resolved, yet everything is minuted
And yet, somehow, at 4:59 pm, someone smiles.
“It’s another day well-administered.”
No comments:
Post a Comment