Abstract
Current debates on subjectivities at work highlight problems of a stress related loss of meaningfulness at work. Different authors argue that more and more employees suffer from the experience of meaninglessness at work. However, such a perspective tends to neglect individual ways of appropriating work, which the present article addresses. Based on a sample of 40 highly qualified professionals, three ideal types of appropriating work are identified: type A, “progressive sense-making”, type B, “defensive protection of purpose”, and type C, “pragmatic preservation of purpose”. Each type stands for a specific view of the chances for creative meaning-making and identifies a dominant form of appropriation, including type-specific ambivalences. Taken as a whole, the three types reveal the heterogeneity and ambiguity in appropriating work. The paper thus provides insights into subjective practices of meaning-making at and of work, contributing to a better understanding of the interaction of subjectivity and work.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Hardering, F., & Will-Zocholl, M. (2019). In between meaning-making and preservation of meaning – modes of appropriation of highly qualified service work. Berliner Journal Fur Soziologie, 29(3–4), 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11609-020-00404-8
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.