362 ACCOUNTING FOR MANAGERS
Today, the belief in markets (as an optimal form of organization) seems to be
firmly entrenched in Anglo-American political cultures, and in those of some
continental-European states. Governmental pressures, inevitably, in this view, led
to investment in financial calculation and the construction of the railway as a
business enterprise. Support for this ‘‘theory of inevitability’’ might be sought by
retrospective application of the present political determination to privatize ER, or
at least some of its businesses.
As Fligstein (1990) notes, in a rather different critique, such an interpretation
relies on understandings of the present to construct appreciations of the past:
interpreting the past through the present, rather than the present through the past.
ER had a remarkably strong heritage which survived previous attacks. In the early
1980s, its privatization was not just undiscussed, it was inconceivable. Arguably,
the business culture in ER, the reconstruction of the railway through the ‘‘bottom
line(s)’’ as a series of businesses, actually created preconditions for the discussion
of privatization, not vice versa.
For sure, the early 1980s witnessed the beginnings of the sea change in atti-
tudes towards the public services that swept across the political culture later
in the decade. Through influential right-wing think-tanks the idea of subject-
ing public services to an entrepreneurial principle was then emerging, later to
be manifested in the ‘‘rolling back’’ of the public sector through the privati-
zation of many public utilities and attempts to introduce market mechanisms
in others. Associated with this was the emerging idea of the ‘‘dependence’’
culture, and its repudiation; to be replaced by an ‘‘enterprise’’ culture. Indi-
viduals, and organizations, were expected to take a responsibility for their
own destiny.
However, the initiative for business management in ER, conceived in the
late 1970s, preceded these political developments, and appears to have been a
substantially autonomous development in a separate arena: as one of the initiators
in the senior management group explained, it was ‘‘the product of thinking
railwaymen’’. Explicating this claim would require careful analysis of historical
materials beyond the scope of this paper. But such evidence as is available supports
the view that the initiative was developed largely independently of political ideas,
its private sector leanings probably owing more to the advice of a few business
consultants than to any political agenda. Certainly it was not government-inspired;
indeed government was initially sceptical, only later endorsing the ideas (and
applying them to its own ends).
That said, the initiative was congruent with the ideas emerging outside, and its
subsequent elaboration into the business culture undoubtedly owes much to their
development. Even here, though, due importance must be attached to the spe-
cific circumstances within the organization. Public sector management was under
challenge, morale was low. Many in the senior management group were receptive
to the new ideas. Business Management was seen as a home-grown solution to
governmental attack. It expressed some kind of empowerment, a potential free-
dom from the yoke of government restriction, and an opportunity for managers
to show their entrepreneurial capabilities.