Commensuration as a Social Process

Abstract

Although it is evident in routine decision-making and a crucial vehicle of rationalization, commensuration as a general social process has been given little consideration by sociologists. This article defines commensuration as the comparison of different entities according to a common metric, notes commensuration's long history as an instrument of social thought, analyzes commensuration as a mode of power, and discusses the cognitive and political stakes inherent in calling something incommensurable. We provide a framework for future empirical study of commensuration and demonstrate how this analytic focus can inform established fields of sociological inquiry.

Performance measurement, modes of evaluation and the development of compromising accounts

“…Such a practice was viewed as privileging the value of 'competition' above that of 'learning' and was thus primarily a debate about the principles and values underlying the use and operation of the league table (c.f., Gehman et al, 2013). Here, there was a passionate response from those actors who felt that a fundamental principle was not being respected (Denis et al, 2007), particularly that the league table ignored their belief that the performance and hence value of country programmes was 'incommensurable' (Espeland & Stevens, 1998 (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2011;Gehman et al, 2013). This helped the actors to confront the latent paradoxes (Jay, 2013) evident in the use of a league table and facilitated 'productive friction' between those who viewed 'competition' as the route to improvement versus those who saw learning as the way to increase quality.…”

Quantifying, Economising, and Marketising: Democratising the social sphere?

“…In the correctional services, for example, psychological expertise might still be valuable but mediated by actuarial and quasi-actuarial methods of identifying the dangerous (Simon, 2005). The prison ratings discussed above may offer "standardised ways of constructing proxies for uncertain and elusive qualities" (Espeland and Stevens, 1998). Yet, abstract values, such as those of a prisoner's dignity and decency, are themselves transformed by the conventions of quantification applied to them.…”

Unsettling issues: valuing public goods and the production of matters of concern

“…The valuographer, living among his or her 'people' to observe the process of valuing, sees it as a practice, and a practical act, itself embedded in and represented by specialized evaluative tools and technologies. Public goods are rendered into numbers, metrics and incentives, and negotiations over value hinge on making things commensurable, or even the same (Espeland andStevens 1998, MacKenzie 2008). Such endeavours are not always successful; the goods in question may remain stubbornly resistant to economic measures.…”