Hodson, R., & Sullivan T. A.
(1995).
Social Organization of Work.
"Alienation occurs when work provides inadequately for human needs for identity and meaning. Work is alienating to the extent that one does it only from economic necessity, not from its intrinsic pleasures." (p. 56)
"A common response to alienating work is passive resistance through making work into a game (Burawoy, 2000), restricting one`s output (Roy, 1952), or focusing on aspects of work tangential to the main productive activity (Collinson, 2003). For instance, workers often adjust to alienating situations by focusing on interactions with their peers. Managers label such behavioral responses 'poor performance.' However, such behaviors do not necessarily result from incompetence or laziness: rather, they may be straightforward responses to having a job that is tedious, repetitive, or alienating. These responses are difficult to predict from workers' levels of job satisfaction or commitment. Workers who are very committed to their work may be the ones most likely to resist alienating conditions. Those who are less committed may simply exit or grudgingly suffer in silence." (p. 68)
Heatherton, T. F.
(2003).
The Social Psychology of Stigma.
"How do people come to accept their own unjust treatment of the stigmatized? Ideological commitments lead them to self-justification. A justification ideology exempts stigmatized individuals from full moral inclusion, and as a result, the stigma in conjunction with the ideology can lead to rough treatment." (p. 128)
Hirigoyen, M. - F.
(2000).
Stalking the Soul.
"Abuse of power has always existed but today it is often disguised. Executives talk about autonomy and initiative but still demand submissiveness and obedience. Employees march to their company's drummer because they are haunted by management's bottom line, the threat of unemployment, and the constant reminder of their responsibility and therefore possible blame." (p. 68)
Hort, B. E.
(1996).
Unholy Hungers : Encountering the Psychic Vampire in Ourselves and Others.
"We, too, try to emulate the gods, but unlike the Greeks, we seem dangerously ignorant of the peril of hubris. Not that we blindly aspire to godhood from stupidity or arrogance; rather, we aspire to godhood because the modern demigods we revere are themselves mortal, so we quite reasonably feel their enviable fate might just as well be our own. What's more, celebrity in our culture is supposed to be available to all who have the guts to seek it, which implies that those who do not attain it are somehow deficient in the skills of self-reinvention"
Hyatt, C., & Gottlieb L.
(1987).
When Smart People Fail.
"There are several basic kinds of organizational environments: corporate, entrepreneurial, intrapreneurial (independent responsibility within a corporate structure), partnership, or complete autonomy (in the case of the artist). Sometimes the real you is in the wrong environment." (p. 109)
Wyatt, J., & Hare C.
(1997).
Work Abuse: How to Recognize and Survive It.
"There are five distinctions that will assist you to see the depth with which work abuse affects people...
1. The Abuse Itself...
2. The Inability to Protest the Abuse...
3. Being Blamed and Feeling Guilty for Reacting against Work Abuse...
4. Having to Deny the Ways that Abuse Affects You...
5. Feeling Guilty for Visible Symptoms that Develop..."
Esty, K. C., Griffin R., & Hirsch M. S.
(1995).
Workplace diversity.
"We think minimizing distinctions makes sense. Research informs us that employees who feel 'out' or 'down' rather than 'in or 'up' also have less job satisfaction, less commitment, and less loyalty to their organization. As an individual manager or supervisor, you can minimize the scrambling after titles and perks by the way you behave. You might consider, for example, moving to a less desirable office space or eliminating some perks based solely on status. Managers who have tried this are often amazed at the positive results." (p. 110)
Hirschorn, L.
(1990).
The Workplace Within: Psychodynamics of Organizational Life.
"Irrational processes highlight the limits of classical organization theory. Theorists such as Simon, Thompson, and Galbraith* have argued that all organizations face continuing uncertainties and have suggested that organizational routines and structures, such as maintaining inventory to meet unpredictable demands for products, are mechanisms for reducing uncertainty. But because these theorists have not linked the experience of uncertainty to people's feelings of anxiety, they have posed the issue of uncertainty too narrowly and have proposed solutions that rely on such rational methods as mathematical calculation and organization design. When anxiety intrudes, rational procedures are distorted by irrational processes. For example, the managers of the manufacturing and sales departments in many companies fight chronically with one another over inventory policy, each blaming the other for the gap between market demand and company supply. Because they feel anxious, they project their sense of blame and failure outward, often scapegoating the person they must cooperate with to reduce the uncertainty they face." (p. 3)