Commercialising Bodies: Action, Subjectivity and the New Corporate Health Ethic

Part of the Health, Technology and Society book series (HTE)


This chapter proposes that companies are taking a new biopolitical interest in health which is leading to a convergence of work and health. When  digital self-tracking (DST) devices are used in corporate wellness (CW) programmes, they form a socio-technical assemblage which enables companies to improve health through encouraging higher levels of activity while increasing productivity. Economic interests and an incitement to health are merged with an ethical concern for the population and a drive to ‘do good’ as part of social responsibility. This dual concern with commerce and health improvement, enabled by the development of DST, is causing healthiness (and virtuousness) to become increasingly associated with ‘activity’, which becomes a general arbiter of moral value.



All interview material used in this chapter was gained with informed consent and is used with permission.


  1. ABIresearch. (2013). Corporate Wellness is a 13 Million Unit Wearable Wireless Device Opportunity. 25 September 2013. Available at: [Accessed on October 12, 2015].
  2. Armstrong, D. (1993). Public health spaces and the fabrication of identity. Sociology, 27(3), 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, D. (1995). The rise of surveillance medicine. Sociology of Health & Illness, 17(3), 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berardi, F. (2009). The Soul at work: From alienation to autonomy. Semiotext(e): Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  5. Bloom, P. (2016). Work as the contemporary limit of life: Capitalism, the death drive, and the lethal fantasy of ‘work-life balance’. Organization, 23(4), 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  7. Bröckling, U. (2016). The entrepreneurial self: Fabricating a new type of subject. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. BSR. (2013). A new CSR frontier: Business and population health: Mobilizing CSR to strengthen corporate engagement on health and wellness across the value chain. Available at: [Accessed on April 10, 2016].
  9. BuckConsultants. (2014). Working Well: A Global Survey of Health Promotion, Workplace Wellness, and Productivity Strategies. Available at: [Accessed on January 07, 2016].
  10. Caffentzis, G. (undated). The work/energy crisis and the apocalypse. Available at: [Accessed on April 10, 2016].
  11. Campbell, D. (2015). Prof Bruce Keogh: Wearable technology plays a crucial part in NHS future. The Guardian, 19 January 2015. Available at: [Accessed on September 09, 2015].
  12. Cederström, C., & Grassman, R. (2010). The unbearable weight of happiness. In C. Cederström & C. Hoedemakers (Eds.), Lacan and organization (pp. 101–132). London: MayFlyBooks.Google Scholar
  13. Cederström, C., & Spicer, A. (2015). The wellness syndrome. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  14. Chu, C., Driscoll, T., & Dwyer, S. (1997). The health-promoting workplace: An integrative perspective. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 21(4), 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Conrad, P., & Walsh, D. C. (1992). The new corporate health ethic: Lifestyle and the social control of work. International Journal of Health Services Research, 22(1), 89–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dagher, G., Chapa, O., & Junaid, N. (2015). The historical evolution of employee engagement and self-efficacy constructs. Journal of Management History, 21(2), 232–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dale, K., & Burrell, G. (2014). Being occupied: An embodied re-reading of organizational “wellness”. Organization, 21(2), 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davies, S. (2015). Wearable tech usage to grow by 60 Percent this year. Bionicly, 3 November 2015. Available at: [Accessed November 4, 2015].
  19. Davies, W. (2016). The Happiness industry: How the government and big business sold us well-being. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  20. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Ehrenreich, B. (1985, February 21). Hers. The New York Times, Available at: [Accessed January 5, 2016].
  22. Dörre, K., Lessenich, S., & Rosa, H. (2015). Sociology, capitalism, critique. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  23. Farrell, K. D. (2015). 8 Crazy-Simple Ways Parents Can Slip Fitness into Their Day. The Fitbit Blog. Available at: [Accessed April 24, 2016].
  24. Field, A. (2014). Venture Capital Flocks to the ‘Quantified Self’. The network: Cisco’s Technology News Site, 3 June 2014. Available at: [Accessed November 10, 2015].
  25. Fitbit. (undated). Train smarter. Go farther. Available at: [Accessed January 7, 2016].
  26. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Giardina, M. (2010). One day, one goal? PUMA, corporate philanthropy and the cultural politics of brand ‘Africa’. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, 13(1), 130–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gillick, M. (1984). Health promotion, jogging, and the pursuit of the moral life. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 9(3), 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. GCC. (undated a). GCC. Available at: [Accessed April 10, 2016].
  30. GCC. (undated b). Proof it works. Available at: [Accessed April 10, 2016].
  31. GCC. (undated c). How it works. Available at: [Accessed April 10, 2016].
  32. GCC. (2016a). Get Engaged: How a healthy culture can drive greater employee commitment and engagement. GCC Insights. Available at: [Accessed September 16, 2016].
  33. GCC. (2016b). Happy days: Drive better business outcomes with happiness and positive emotion. GCC Insights. Available at: [Accessed September 16, 2016].
  34. Guéry, F., & Deleule, D. (2014). The productive body. Winchester: Zero Books.Google Scholar
  35. Haunschild, A. (2003). Humanization through discipline? Foucault and the goodness of employee health programmes. Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, 2(3), 46–59.Google Scholar
  36. Herrick, C. (2011). Governing health and consumption: Sensible citizens, behaviour and the city. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  37. Holliday, R., & Thompson, G. (2001). A body of work. In R. Holliday & J. Hassard (Eds.), Contested bodies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Larsen, L. T. (2011). The Birth of lifestyle politics: The biopolitical management of lifestyle diseases in the United States and Denmark. In U. Bröckling, S. Krasmann, & T. Lemke (Eds.), Governmentality: Current issues and future challenges (pp. 201–220). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Lazzarato, M. (2014). Signs and machines: Capitalism and the production of subjectivity. Semiotext(e): Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  40. Ledger, D., & McCaffrey, D. (2014). Inside wearables: How the science of human behaviour change offers the secret to long-term engagement. Endeavour Partners. Available at: [Accessed January 2, 2016].
  41. Lomborg, S., & Frandsen, K. (2015). Self-tracking as communication. Information, Communication & Society. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1067710.Google Scholar
  42. Lupton, D. (2013). Understanding the human machine. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 32, 25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maravelias, C. (2009). Health promotion and flexibility: Extending and obscuring power in organizations. British Journal of Management 20(S), 194–203.Google Scholar
  44. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McGillivray, D. (2005). Fitter, happier, more productive: Governing working bodies through wellness. Culture and Organization, 11(2), 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McGoey, L. (2014). The philanthropic state: Market-state hybrids in the philanthrocapitalist turn. Third World Quarterly, 35(1), 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore, P., & Robinson, A. (2015). The quantified self: What counts in the neoliberal workplace. New Media & Society. doi: 10.1177/146/4448/5604328.Google Scholar
  48. Petersen, A., & Lupton, D. (1996). The new public health: Health and self in the age of risk. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Robinson, J., & Godbey, G. (2005). Business as usual. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 72(2), 407–426.Google Scholar
  50. Ruckenstein, M., & Pantzar, M. (2015). Beyond the quantified self: Thematic exploration of a dataistic paradigm. New Media & Society. doi: 10.1177/1461444815609081.Google Scholar
  51. Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sparrow, P. (2014). Are we now mature enough to ask the harder questions, the ‘engage with what?’ challenge. Engage For Success. Available at: [Accessed September 16, 2016].
  53. Statista. (2015). Facts and statistics on wearable technology. Statista. Available at: [Accessed January 1, 2016].
  54. Swan, M. (2009). Emerging patient-driven health care models: An examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 6(2), 492–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thorup, M. (2013). Pro Bono? On philanthrocapitalism as ideological answer to inequality. Ephemera: Theory & Politics Organization, 13(3), 555–576.Google Scholar
  56. Till, C. (2014). Exercise as labour: Quantified self and the transformation of exercise into labour. Societies, 4(3), 446–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van Dijk, J. (2006). The network society: Social aspects of new media. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  58. Weber, M. (2001). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Whitson, J. (2014). Foucault’s fitbit: Governance and gamification. In S. P. Walz & S. Deterding (Eds.), The gameful world: Approaches, issues and applications (pp. 339–358). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wollard, K., & Shuck, B. (2011). Antecedents to employee engagement: A structured review of the literature. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(4), 429–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leeds Beckett UniversityEnglandUK

Personalised recommendations