Throughout this book, I have documented growing problems with the quality of academic life, how academics do their jobs, and a habit of over-theorisation within management studies that is handcuffed to the fetish of prioritising where something is published rather than what is written. Some suggestions have been made about how we should address these problems. But we need more than formal measures by powerful agencies. I think we also need a shift in our own mind-sets. A certain fatalism has gripped academics about our working lives and publishing practices. We are, it is said, evaluated, harassed, exhausted and even bullied as never before. Universities and regulatory bodies are more concerned with monitoring where we publish than whether we have something meaningful to say. Careers thrive if we ‘play the game’ and languish if we don’t. (By the way, how high is your h-index today, and what is your total number of citations on Google Scholar?) There is, we often say, nothing that we can do about it. As I have noted before in this book, it is even increasingly common to hear people speak of ‘the publishing game’.