“Just Theater!”—How Self-Legitimation Practices Can Backfire in International Organizations

Abstract

Working in international organizations (IOs) is not always a pleasure. Contradictory external demands make it difficult to do the right thing, constant failures in the field lead to frustration, and hierarchical structures require “emotional labor” on the part of IO staff. While we know that IO leadership therefore engages in self-legitimation practices to strengthen employee motivation and maintain organizational cohesion, we know little about the actual results of these activities. To address this gap, I focus on the perceptions of “ordinary” IO employees. Based on seventy-five in-depth interviews with IO staff in two different IOs, the United Nations (UN) Secretariat and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), I develop a typology of five different staff responses to internal legitimation. I show that leadership’s legitimation efforts can not only result in (i) acceptance and adoption of the given narratives but also lead to (ii) criticism, (iii) toleration, (iv) cynicism, or even (v) exit of IO employees. Thus, ironically, the very leadership activities that are supposed to foster internal stability can also backfire and contribute to the destabilization of the IO. Building on these findings, I discuss two factors that influence IO employees’ perception of self-legitimation practices and are crucial for their success: the credibility of IO leaders and the right balance between glossing over and self-criticism in their legitimation narratives. I conclude by arguing that, contrary to common belief, legitimation and critique are not irreconcilable opposites. Rather, self-criticism can be an integral part of successful legitimation.