Metric Power pp 189-215 | Cite as

Coda: Metric Power and the Production of Uncertainty (How Does Metric Power Make Us Feel?)

  • David Beer


This chapter provides an extra dimension to the previous discussions of metric power. This chapter acts as a ‘coda’ to the previous chapters. It provides an analysis of the bodily and emotional dimensions of metric power. The key argument of the chapter is that the power of metrics is in how they make us feel. It is in the feelings that metrics evoke that we are cajoled and pushed towards certain behaviours and practices. The chapter returns to the discussion of neoliberalism to argue that metrics are the means by which uncertainty is produced in people. To explore this, the chapter draws upon work on affect, and particularly Margaret Wetherell’s concept of ‘affective practice’, to develop an understanding of the bodily and emotional properties of metric power.


Social Relation Affective Response Affective Property Previous Chapter League Table 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahmed, S. (2004). Affective economies. Social Text, 22(2), 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed, S. (2010). Happy objects. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 29–51). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Amoore, L. (2011). Data derivatives: On the emergence of a security risk calculus for our times. Theory Culture and Society, 28(6), 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, B. (2009). Affective atmospheres. Emotion, Space and Society, 2(1), 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anonymous. (2014, May 24). Secret teacher: Why are we really put through the pain of ofsted inspections? Guardian. Accessed November 12, 2014, from
  6. Ash, J. (2010). Architectures of affect: Anticipating and manipulating the event in processes of videogame design and testing. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28(4), 653–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beer, D. (2015b). Productive measures: Culture and measurement in the context of everyday neoliberalism. Big Data and Society, 2(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beer, D. (2015c, August 7). When ‘special measures’ become ordinary. Open Democracy. Accessed November 23, 2015, from‘special-measures’-become-ordinary
  9. Bersin, J. (2013, February 17). Big data in human resources: Talent analytics comes of age. Forbes. Accessed November 12, 2014, from
  10. Blackman, L. (2012). Immaterial bodies: Affect, embodiment, mediation. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blackman, L., & Venn, C. (2010). Affect. Body and Society, 16(1), 7–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brenner, N., Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2010). Variegated neoliberalization: Geographies, modalities, pathways. Global Networks, 10(2), 182–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, N. (2015a). Metrics of hope: Disciplining affect in oncology. Health, 19(2), 119–136.Google Scholar
  14. Burkitt, I. (2014). Emotions and social relations. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burrows, R. (2012). Living with the h-index? Metric assemblage in the contemporary academy. Sociological Review, 60(2), 355–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clough, P. T. (2008). The affective turn: Political economy, biomedia and bodies. Theory Culture and Society, 25(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clough, P. T. (2010). Afterword: The future of affect. Body and Society, 16(1), 222–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davies, W. (2014). The limits of neoliberalism. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Davies, W. (2015a). The Happiness Industry: How the Government and Big Business Sold Us Well-being. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  20. Deloitte. (2015). Global human capital trends 2015: Leading in the new world of work. London: Deloitte University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Espeland, W. (2015). Narrating numbers. In R. Rottenburg, S. E. Merry, S. J. Park, & J. Mugler (Eds.), The world of indicators: The making of governmental knowledge through quantification (pp. 56–75). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113(1), 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (2008). A sociology of quantification. European Journal of Sociology, 49(3), 401–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fallon, N. (2014, September 9). Big data: It’s not just for customer insights. Business News Daily. Accessed October 27, 2014, from
  25. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Gane, N. (2012). The governmentalities of neoliberalism: Panopticism, post-panopticism and beyond. Sociological Review, 60(4), 611–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gill, R. (2010). Breaking the silence: The hidden injuries of the neoliberal university. In R. Ryan-Flood & R. Gill (Eds.), Secrecy and silence in the research process: Feminist reflections (pp. 228–244). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Gill, R., & Pratt, A. (2008). In the social factory? Immaterial labour, precariousness and cultural work. Theory Culture and Society, 25(7–8), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hardt, M. (2007). Foreword: What affects are good for. In P. T. Clough & J. Halley (Eds.), The affective turn: Theorizing the social. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hill, D. W. (2015). The pathology of communicative capitalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hockey, J., James, A., & Smart, C. (2014). Introduction. In C. Smart, J. Hockey, & A. James (Eds.), The craft of knowledge: Experiences of living with data (pp. 1–18). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huus, T. (2015). People data: How to use and apply human capital metrics in your company. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kantor, J., & Streitfeld, D. (2015, August 15). Inside Amazon: Wrestling big ideas in a bruising workplace. The New York Times. Accessed August 19, 2015, from
  34. Konings, M. (2015). The emotional logic of capitalism: What progressives have missed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Leys, R. (2011). The turn to affect: A critique. Critical Inquiry, 37(3), 434–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lilley, S., & Lightfoot, G. (2013). The embodiment of neoliberalism: Exploring the roots and limits of the calculation of arbitrage in the entrepreneurial function. The Sociological Review, 62(1), 68–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mirowski, P. (2013). Never let a serious crisis go to waste: How neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  38. Porter, T. M. (1995). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Power, M. (2007). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Probyn, E. (2010). Writing shame. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 71–90). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Rushforth, A., & de Rijcke, S. (2015). Accounting for impact? The journal impact factor and the making of biomedical research in the Netherlands. Minerva, 53(2), 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scharff, C. (2015). The psychic life of neoliberalism: Mapping the contours of entrepreneurial subjectivity. Theory, Culture and Society. Online first. doi: 10.1177/0263276415590164.Google Scholar
  43. Seigworth, G. J., & Gregg, M. (2010). An inventory of shimmers. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 1–25). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Simmel, G. (2004). The philosophy of money. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wetherell, M. (2014). Trends in the turn to affect: A social psychological critique. Body and Society. Online first. doi: 10.1177/1357034X14539020.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Beer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations