Rekindling the discourse: Organization studies in community psychology

Abstract

When Meg Bond delivered her Presidential Address to Division 27 members in 1998, she called for a continued study of organizational contexts where, proportionally, people spend most of their time. Her argument is parallel to others~Bennett, Anderson, Cooper, Hassol, Klein, & Rosenblum, 1966;Rappaport, 1977;Shinn, 1987;Trickett, 1996! who have long thought that community psychologists should study issues in diverse and multiple contexts. Today, some of the major contextual settings of our lives include the organizations where we work, play, and volunteer. In fact, most of us exist within multiple, overlapping, organizational systems. For example, middle and upper class individuals work in a primary organization~e.g., a work site, school, or in the government!, and in addition, function in boy0girl scout troops, school council boards, domestic violence shelters, and other volunteer organizations. The home or neighborhood is no longer the community where we spend most of our time. Most of our daily interpersonal contacts, and more generally our human existence, occurs within and in-relation-to organizations.It is hard to imagine a person who is completely disconnected from any organizational system. Some marginalized and oppressed groups-like the poor and the homeless-tend to be dependent on the policies and procedures of government organizations~federal, state, and local agencies!, nonprofits, and the social responsibility projects of profit making firms. Much of their interaction with these organizations is in relation to human service provision~e.g., health, welfare, education!. Some directly live and function within public organizational systems~e.g., missions, group homes, prisons, and other institutional care!, while others interact with profit-making organizational systems as customers to their services. Thus, in line with this logic, we suggest that we all may be living in organizational communities, where organizations are functioning as our professional neighborhoods. As such, we must consider the extent to which there has been any meaningful discourse regarding organizational contexts or organization theory within the field of community psychology?In June of 1987, a special issue of the American Journal of Community Psychologỹ AJCP! was dedicated to organizational concerns. To open up a discourse in this area, Keys and Frank~1987! asked two main questions in their lead article:~1! What does community psychology contribute to the study of organizations?, and,~2! What does the study of organizations contribute to community psychology? In attempting to answer the first question, the authors suggested that community psychologists offer a unique perspective with a focus on the well-being of the worker within the varying contexts of organizations. Community psychologists are interested in the quality of life and psychological needs of the workers that operate within organizations. Considering that much of the literature on organizations promotes performance and profitability ideals for the organization, the com...

Practicing what we teach? An autobiographical reflection on navigating academia as a single mother

“…Unfortunately, despite an interest in organizational research (Boyd & Angelique, 2002), community psychologists have largely failed to research the academic settings in which many of us work (Cauce, 2007). Feminist community psychologists seem particularly well-suited to conduct research in the academy and address the concerns outlined in this article: We are aware of the importance of recognizing and chronicling the diversity in women's experiences; we view dominant cultures with critical eyes; we are cognizant of the ecological factors that shape people's experiences, and of the fact that if you want to improve people's quality of life, it is important to address and change the many-layered contextual environment in which people live; and we value collaborative relationships.…”

Community organizations and sense of community: further development in theory and measurement

“…Boyd and Angelique (2002) noted that the principal setting for study of SOC in organizations was the workplace rather than community organizations. One early exception they noted was that of Hughey, Speer, and Peterson's (1999) study, which introduced a conceptual framework and measure, the Community Organization Sense of Community Scale (COSOC).…”

“…Embedded in this description of SOC is an issue that is central to community psychology-that is, the connections between individuals and the larger social groups of which they are a part. Heretofore, research on SOC has focused primarily on connections among individuals within neighborhoods or workplaces (Boyd & Angelique, 2002), although the connections articulated by McMillan and Chavis (1986) are, in part, germane to the context of community organizations. Writing on the occasional inclusion of the organizational frame in community psychology (e.g., Boyd & Angelique, 2007;Shinn & Perkins, 2000), Keys (2007) observed, ''Organizational perspectives can provide important intellectual counterweights to the myriad individual perspectives we find in abundance in both the discipline of psychology and western societies' ' (p. 277).…”

Foreword

“…In short, we are fortunate that Boyd and Angelique (2002) have chosen to "rekindle the discourse" between community psychology and organizational studies. This special issue has much to offer in identifying contemporary ways in which community psychology can more actively learn from, and contribute to, organizational theory and research.…”