In between meaning-making and preservation of meaning – modes of appropriation of highly qualified service work

1Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

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.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free