Work, Recognition and the Changing Face of Capitalism Admiration without Appreciation? The Paradoxes of Recognition of Doubly Subjectivised Work

Voswinkel, Stephan

doi:10.1163/9789004215467_011

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Stephan Voswinkel makes a distinction between recognition as appreciation and recognition as admiration to shed light on this phenomenon (Voswinkel 2012). Recognition as appreciation has to do with the acknowledgment of service performed by the employee to the company or employing organization.…”

Section: Conflicts Of Recognition At Work: Appreciation Versus Admiramentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Work and the Politics of Misrecognition

Smith

Deranty

2012

Res Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we examine the idea of a politics of misrecognition of working activity. We begin by introducing a distinction between the kind of recognition and misrecognition that attaches to one's identity, and the kind of recognition and misrecognition that attaches to one's activity. We then consider the political significance of the latter kind of recognition and misrecognition in the context of work. Drawing first on empirical research undertaken by sociologists at the Institut fu¨r Sozialforschung in Frankfurt, we argue for a differentiated concept of recognition that shows the politics of misrecognition at work to be as much a matter of conflict between modes of recognition as it is a struggle for recognition as opposed to non-recognition. The differentiated concept of recognition which allows for this empirical insight owes much to Axel Honneth's theory. But as we argue in the section that follows, this theory is ambiguous about the normative content of the expectations of recognition that are bound up with the activity of working. This in turn makes it unclear how we should understand the normative basis of the politics of the misrecognition of what one does at work. In the final sections of the article, we suggest that the psychodynamic model of work elaborated by Christophe Dejours and others at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Me´tiers in Paris can shed light on this matter; that is to say, it can help to clarify the normative significance and political stakes of the misrecognition of working activity.

show abstract

Section: Conflicts Of Recognition At Work: Appreciation Versus Admiramentioning

confidence: 99%

“… See Honneth (1995a), in which he distinguishes three fundamental forms of recognition: love, respect and esteem Voswinkel's (2012). distinction between admiration and appreciation effectively introduces a further level of differentiation within the realm of esteem.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Work and the Politics of Misrecognition

Smith

Deranty

2012

Res Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Voswinkel (, ) further distinguishes two types of esteem: appreciation for service, such as long‐term work for one institution; and admiration for ability, as for especially talented workers. Voswinkel () argues that transformations in contemporary workplaces, including decentralized corporate structures and weaker bonds between business and employees, have shifted esteem at work from appreciation towards admiration. The extent of this transformation is contested (Doogan ; Sennett ; Tweedie ).…”

Section: Responding To Chrm: Pm Recognition and Identity At Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Messner ). It might also be argued, following Voswinkel (), that increasing ‘admiration’ for research performance commensurately degrades ‘appreciation’ for university service. However, as Messner () notes, these same PM systems can also recognize the ‘usefulness’ and ‘beauty’, in Dejours’ () sense, of academic research contributions that might go unnoticed in university cultures that prioritize group allegiance over performance, by providing ‘outside legitimacy’ to these contributions.…”

Section: Responding To Chrm: Pm Recognition and Identity At Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Does Performance Management Affect Workers? Beyond Human Resource Management and Its Critique

Tweedie

Wild

Rhodes³

et al. 2018

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While performance management (PM) is pervasive across contemporary workplaces, extant research into how performance management affects workers is often indirect or scattered across disciplinary silos. This paper reviews and synthesizes this research, identifies key gaps and explores ‘recognition theory’ as a nascent framework that can further develop this important body of knowledge. The paper develops in three main stages. The first stage reviews ‘mainstream’ human resource management (HRM) research. While this research analyses workers’ reactions to performance management in some depth, its focus on serving organizational goals marginalizes extra‐organizational impacts. The second stage reviews more critical HRM research, which interprets performance management as a disciplinary, coercive or inequitable management device. While this literature adds an important focus on organizational power, there is scope to analyse further how PM affects workers’ well‐being. To develop this strand of PM research, the third stage turns to the emerging field of recognition theory independently developed by Axel Honneth and Christophe Dejours. The authors focus especially on recognition theory's exploration of how (in)adequate acknowledgement of workers’ contributions can significantly affect their well‐being at the level of self‐conception. Although recognition theory is inherently critical, the paper argues that it can advance both mainstream and critical performance management research, and also inform broader inquiry into recognition and identity at work.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, paradoxes of recognition are generated by the contradictory logics of these forms of recognition, and not just by their reduction to the logic of the market. The question of how recognition is given in organizations, and for what, has been explored in depth by researchers at the Institute for Social Research, and amongst their key discoveries is a sharpening differentiation between two modes of recognition: recognition in the form of appreciation, and recognition in the form of admiration (Voswinkel 2001(Voswinkel , 2012. The 'for what?'…”

Section: Paradoxes Of Recognition In Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition Theory as Social Research

O’Neill

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Work, Recognition and the Changing Face of Capitalism Admiration without Appreciation? The Paradoxes of Recognition of Doubly Subjectivised Work

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Work and the Politics of Misrecognition

Work and the Politics of Misrecognition

How Does Performance Management Affect Workers? Beyond Human Resource Management and Its Critique

Recognition Theory as Social Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About