- 240 Downloads
What does social constructionism tell us about understanding and managing stress problems at work? The conclusion will bring together the various ideas and arguments put forward in the previous chapters and will discuss the theoretical and practical implications of interest to both academics and practitioners. Informal meetings and discussions about work should not be considered a waste of time. Disputes over work and working conditions express the difficulties of cooperation and the divergent interests of organizational stakeholders. To ignore them will only make matters worse and risk turning them into personal failings. Establishing and facilitating newer and less formal modes of communication among different organizational stakeholders may help clarify compromises between quality and productivity. All of these processes are likely to facilitate the emergence of a new and more flexible collective response to the problems currently diminishing people’s ability to engage in work, in ways that are beneficial for both the employer and the employee.
- Becker, D. (2013). One nation under stress the trouble with stress as an idea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Brown, M. K. (1988). Working the street: Police discretion and the dilemmas of reform. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Delaunois, M., Malchaire, J., & Piette, A. (2002). Classification des méthodes d’évaluation du stress en entreprise. Médecine du travail & ergonomie, XXXIV(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
- Durkheim, E. (1897). Le suicide. Étude de sociologie. Paris: Felix Alcan.Google Scholar
- Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Loriol, M. (2012). La construction du social. Rennes: PUR.Google Scholar
- Loriol, M. (2017). The collective regulation of SMAC workers’ passion and involvement. Sociologia Del Lavoro, 145, 168–183. https://doi.org/10.3280/SL2017-145010.
- Newton, T. (1995). ‘Managing’ stress: Emotion and power at work. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Schacter, S. (1959). The psychology of affiliation: Experimental studies of the sources of gregariousness. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar