(p.19) The originality of Dejours’ approach is that it illuminates the affective, subjective, and embodied experience of working, focusing particularly on the affect of suffering—as a consequence of the encounter of the subject with what Dejours calls the ‘real of work’—and the way in which this affect can—or cannot—be sublimated. This framework also articulates the role of the work organization and the significance of the work collective in creating and/or transforming such affect. Dejours’ theory is much needed in psychoanalytically inspired research in organization studies because it points out the centrality of work in human life and, as we will see,...

(p.21) In contrast to the perspectives inspired by the Tavistock Institute (such as Menzies Lyth, 1991 and followers), Lacanian scholars hold a pessimistic (or ambiguous) position with regards to the role of work in the health of subjects. These researchers focus rather on ideological and fantasmatic discourses on work (see in particular the chapters in the edited book by Cederström and Hoedemaekers, 2010).2 Affective discourses of boundaryless careers, creativity, personal development, self-fulfillment, and freedom subtly control workers, especially when such discourses match objectives of production and efficiency (Bloom, 2015; Bloom and Cederström, 2009). Ekman (2013) understands passion and emotional devotion to...

(p.22) Dejours’ theory is really centered on what working does psychically to the subject, how it affects him or her. For Dejours, some level of suffering is inevitable in all types of work (even though, admittedly, some categories of work are more painful than others). Nevertheless, and fundamentally, work can contribute to subjective and social enrichment. The underlying assumption is that human beings generally want to work well, and they gain satisfaction when given the opportunity to do so (Dejours, 1980, 1998)

(p.31) The originality of Dejours’ perspective is that it is, to our knowledge, the only one that extensively illustrates the affective and embodied experience of working, by demonstrating how the subject needs to answer to the real at work. Specifically, depending on the work organization, the subject at work may experience pleasure or pathological suffering. The implication of this is vast.

(p.132) As with Frankfurt School theorists (e.g., Honneth, 2009), health from this perspective is seen as the capacity for the development of autonomous subjectivity and a sense of self-worth (Dejours, 2015b). In this context, therefore, health does not mean the absence of illness, but rather the constant struggle to maintain a stable conception of the self, which can be derived from being able to do proper and good quality work, and from recognizing oneself in the product of one’s work, as well as having one’s work recognized by peers (Dejours, 2015b). The extent to which workers are able to develop this...