The popularisation of Positive Psychology as a defence against behavioural complexity in research and organisations

Abstract

<strong>Orientation:</strong> Positive Psychology’s focus on positive behaviour has resulted in research and organisational consultants to focus relatively more on positive behaviour, thus avoiding negative and often unconscious behaviour and its manifestations.<p><strong>Research purpose:</strong> The aim of the study was to explore the systems psychodynamic nature of the manifesting defensive structures operating in Positive Psychology.</p><p><strong>Motivation for the study:</strong> The study investigated the popularity of Positive Psychology amongst academics, students and organisational consultants and the tendency to avoid the complexity of the relatedness between positive and negative as part of the human condition.</p><p><strong>Research design, approach and method: </strong>Qualitative research by means of a Listening Post was used, consisting of six psychologists in their roles as lecturers and organisational consultants. Thematic analyses led to the formulation of various working hypotheses, integrated into a research hypothesis.</p><p><strong><strong>Main findings:</strong> </strong>Four themes manifested – namely, the manifesting defence mechanisms, a reluctance to relinquish positive psychology as an object of hope, a need to guard against being too hasty in breaking down positive psychology and a need for a psychology that can engage us in a conversation about integrating the complexities of the human condition.</p><p><strong><strong>Practical/managerial implications:</strong> </strong>The findings were linked to Deo Strümpfer’s work, indicating that Positive Psychology originated in early 20th century psychology, which is indeed not about simplification, but is imbedded in the complexity of various behavioural continua.</p><p><strong><strong>Contribution/value-add:</strong> </strong>Academics, students and organisational consultants are encouraged to revisit Strümpfer’s work to ensure that this psychology is appreciated for its depth and quality.</p><p><strong><strong>How to cite this article:</strong><br /> </strong>Cilliers, F., & May, M. (2010). The popularisation of Positive Psychology as a defence against behavioural complexity in research and organisations. <em>SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 36</em>(2), Art. #917, 10 pages. DOI: 10.4102/sajip.v36i2.917</p&gt

Dimensionality of the UWES-17: An item response modelling analysis

“…For many years, research in occupational psychology was framed within a disease model with the emphasis on dysfunction and negative aspects of work such as stress and burnout (Balducci, Fraccaroli & Schaufeli, 2010;Storm & Rothmann, 2003). In this regard, and in part due to the limited number of positive constructs in occupational psychology, work engagement has emerged as a prominent and popular area of research (Cilliers & May, 2010;Seppälä et al, 2009). …”

Individual diversity management and salutogenic functioning

“…On the other hand ineffective diversity management manifested as task and governance (blue) values with the preference for separation, power, control, rules, structure, procedure, routines, order, tradition and punishment. Self-authorization (versus hiding behind external • authority such as religion and organizational power) manifested in how managers could speak with personal conviction, aware of their impact on others, and willing to take responsibility for their views and feelings (Cilliers & May, 2010). The management style (Goleman • et al, 2008;Rooke & Torbert, 2005) associated with effective diversity management was transformational (compared to transactional).…”

Deploying culture as a defence against incompetence: The unconscious dynamics of public service work

“…It draws on and contributes to attempts that employ object relations thinking (Klein, 1959) to make sense of anxiety and defence within organisations in general (Bain, 1998;Cilliers & May, 2010;Cummins, 2002;Gould, Ebers & Clinchy, 1999;Jaques, 1955), social service institutions (Bott-Spillus, 1990;Gibson & Swartz, 2000, 2001Menzies-Lyth, 1988;Obholzer & Roberts, 1994;Willshire, 1999) and public service organisations (Dartington, 2004;Dempsey, 2007;Hoggett, 2006;Mnguni, 2010Mnguni, , 2008. Whereas most of these studies concur that anxiety within public and social service organisations derives primarily from the intrinsic nature of their primary task, Hoggett (2006) problematises the very notion of a primary task as simplistic.…”