INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATION THEORY AND BEHAVIOR, 12 (3), 380-501
FALL 2009
SYMPOSIUM ON
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH
THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS, PART I
Editors: Adrian N. Carr and Cheryl A. Lapp
Copyright © 2009 by Pracademics Press
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATION THEORY AND BEHAVIOR, 12 (3), 381-405
FALL 2009
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH
THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
Adrian N. Carr and Cheryl A. Lapp*
ABSTRACT. This paper introduces this special issue and initially provides
some contextual background to the field of psychodynamics, its significance
to organisational studies and the understanding of behaviour in
organizations. The internationally-based papers in this special issue are
then introduced and summarised.
INTRODUCTION
In the call for papers, the invitation was for contributions that
highlight the utility of being psychodynamically informed when it
comes to understanding behaviour in organizations. To bring
contributions more into line with the concept of psychodynamics
rather than psychoanalysis (please see Introduction below), we asked
that contributors address themselves to more typical behaviours and
processes rather than the aberrant, deviant, exceptional or the
pathological. Topics suggested for contributors to consider included
but were not limited to: strategy, technology, leadership; group
dynamics; gender; authority relations (including bullying); creativity;
emotionality; politics; identity; cultural change; social and
organisation defences; psychodynamic responses to bureaucratic
--------------------------* Adrian N. Carr, Ph.D., is an adjunct Professor at the Centre for Social
Justice and Social Change, University of Western Sydney, Australia. His
research interests are focused upon psychodynamic explanations of
behaviour in organizations, critical theory and the management of change.
Cheryl A. Lapp, M.Ed., CHRP, is President of Labyrinth Consulting, Canada.
Her research interests pertain to the dynamics of leadership and
followership and organisational development and change through the
application of psychodynamics and critical theory.
Copyright © 2009 by Pracademics Press
382
CARR & LAPP
and other organizational forms; and architecture and aesthetics. In
addressing these or any other themes, it was requested that in
keeping with the Freudian origins of psychodynamics, contributors
would highlight deeper understanding of the unconscious motivation
and meaning of behaviours and processes. This understanding could
come from any of the variety of psychodynamic schools of thought.
Very soon after the call was placed on the internet, Thomas
Basbøll (2005), editor of the Weblog for a management philosophy
group at Copenhagen Business School, noted the call and made a
number of comments including the following:
This psychoanalysis of normality is an interesting, if familiar,
twist. Normally, the analyst is trying get people "adjusted". In
this age of organizational change and corporate restructuring,
perfectly "normal" people are becoming subject to
psychodynamics well beyond their control. We might say
they're trying to keep up with the norm—lifelong
"readjustment".
Even though work on psychodynamics in organizations occurred
as early as the mid 1970s, the references on offer are to point to the
relatively scant amount, to date, of discourse on psychodynamics in
the workplace. For the editors of this special issue, the concept of
readjustment has been an important consideration that has led to a
wide and deep compilation of works, as the reference list shows. In
total, these works demonstrate that much can be said on
psychodynamics in the workplace and are further examples of causes
and effects of readjustment, as Basbøll suggested.
Basbøll (2005) mused about the extent to which there might be a
diversity of contributions. The papers submitted are from a variety of
psychodynamic schools of thought and an internationally diverse
group of people. The authors of the papers in this special issue reside
in Australia, Brazil, Canada, England, France, South Africa and the
United States of America. Indicating the diversity of language as well
as cultural background, the authors from France arranged their own
translation for their paper that they originally wrote in French The
schools of thought are also quite diverse, with contributions from
those invoking the work of Sigmund Freud, Melanie Klein, C. Fred
Alford, Sabina Spielrein, Thomas Ogden, Wilfred Bion, Jacques Lacan
and Michel Foucault. Consequently, this special issue is not only rich
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
383
in psychodynamic rigor, depth and breadth but it also provides the
reader with insights from a more global perspective.
As the means to provide background to some of the discourse
and the application of psychoanalysis in and to organisational
studies, we now turn to the founding works of Sigmund Freud.
INTRODUCTION TO PSYCHOANALYSIS: SIGMUND FREUD
According to Sigmund Freud’s biographer, Ernest Jones (1953, p.
244), the term “psychoanalysis” was coined by Freud and first used
in one of his works that was published in French on March 30, 1896
and then in a work published in German on May 15, 1896.,. Thus, the
term has been in existence for over 100 years. Psychoanalysis, along
with a whole host of other terms and expressions coined by Freud,
are part of the everyday vernacular (e.g., ego, repression,
unconscious). That being said, Freud was keen on reserving the term
psychoanalysis to the body of work that he pioneered. Freud was so
protective of the term and discipline that he insisted those “disciples”
such as Alfred Adler and Carl Jung who broke away from Freud to
found their own forms of psychological analysis: “should cease to
describe their theories as ‘psychoanalysis’” (Freud, 19241925/1986, p. 237). Jungians were to call themselves “analytical
psychologists” and Adlerians, “individual psychologists”. Freud was
very concerned about the manner in which his own foundational
ideas became appropriated by others, because sometimes the same
terminology was used to describe quite different concepts and was
applied to new ideas that either contradicted or in some way
contaminated his original descriptions of psychoanalytic processes he
had discovered (see, for example, Freud, 1922-1923/ 1986, p. 150,
on Jung’s use of the word libido).
Freud gave a number of definitions of the term psychoanalysis.
The most frequent were variants of a description of particular
techniques (e.g., free association, dream work, etc.) in clinical
practice for mental disorders, and or as a collective term for the body
of knowledge gained from such techniques that related principally to
the realm of the unconscious. At one point, in an earlier work, Freud
(1915/1991, p. 46) attempted to describe psychoanalysis in terms of
two fundamental hypotheses that he said were offensive “to the
entire world and have earned its dislike.” The two hypotheses were:
384
CARR & LAPP
The first of these unpopular assertions made by
psychoanalysis declares that mental processes are in
themselves unconscious and that of all mental life it is only
certain individual acts and portions that are conscious (p.
46).…
[The] second thesis, which psychoanalysis puts forward as one
of its findings, is an assertion that instinctual impulses which
can only be described as sexual, both in the narrower and
wider sense of the word, play an extremely large and never
hitherto appreciated part of the causation of nervous and
mental diseases. It asserts further that these same sexual
impulses also make contributions that must not be underestimated to the highest cultural, artistic and social creations
of the human spirit (Freud, 1915/1991, pp. 46 & 47).
As we have noted elsewhere (see Carr, 2002b; Carr & Gabriel,
2001b; Carr & Lapp, 2006a), Freud did not discover the unconscious.
However, in contrast to those in his day who understood the
unconscious to be of little consequence and as a “brain activity,
unaccompanied by mental activity” (Hewett, 1889, p. 32), Freud
discovered the unconscious to be that realm of the mind as the
source of motivation and an active mind’s realm for hiding thoughts
and desires from awareness. Thus, one can better understand the
two aforementioned hypotheses put forward by Freud -- people might
be partly offended because they are afraid of the unknown of the
unconscious. One can begin to see why and how behaviours in and
outside of the workplace can become manifest but with little or no
awareness and explanation: that which cannot be predicted and
explained is frightening.
In discussing what Freud meant by the term psychoanalysis -- as
if to highlight the fact that this had to do with the analysis and
understanding of the unconscious -- it was not uncommon for him to
use this term in association with the term “depth-psychology.” At one
point he wrote:
It may safely be said that the psychoanalytic study of dreams
has given us our first insight into a ‘depth-psychology’ whose
existence had not hitherto been suspected. Fundamental
changes will have to be introduced into normal psychology if it
is to be brought into harmony with these new findings (Freud,
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
385
1913/1986, p. 36; see also Freud, 1915/1984, p. 176 and
the Editor’s note p. 165).
Freud used the term depth-psychology as a more generic term
that relates to the study of activities of the unconscious. On the other
hand, psychoanalysis is one of those schools with a particular group
of “techniques” to undertake such study and with specific ideas as to
how that realm of the mind operates. This appreciation of the
relationship of depth-psychology with psychoanalysis is captured
nicely in a dictionary of psychoanalytic terms that defines depthpsychology as follows:
Depth psychology: any psychology that postulates dynamic
psychic activities that are unconscious. It embraces all
schools deriving from Freud, including many that depart widely
from his teachings, and others of independent origin. (English
& English, 1958/1966, p. 145)
At one stage, the term “neo-psychoanalysis” (see English &
English, 1958/1966, p. 417) was used to denote those who deviated
from the work of Freud, while still claiming some connection to
Freudian ideas. In more contemporary times, the terms depthpsychology and neo-psychoanalysis are seldom used. Instead, we find
the term “psychodynamics” used to cover similar territory. The term
psychodynamics is not only a generic term that includes
psychoanalysis, analytical psychology and individual psychology. For
many, it is also the preferred term as it has less of a treatment
connotation and implies the normality and dynamic nature of the
unconscious. Freud’s work was largely focussed upon individuals who
came to him seeking treatment. It was through analytical techniques
that Freud treated his patients. Yet, in so doing he discovered how
psychodynamic processes occurred in all of us; and not just those
with psychopathologies. Psychodynamics is just as much about the
study of those who are and want to remain well.
The Unconscious in the House That Freud Built
For Freud, the unconscious was akin to the proverbial iceberg,
although when describing the unconscious in his written work, he
used the metaphor of the “cauldron”. More precisely, he described
the realm of the unconscious that he dubbed the “id” to be “a
cauldron full of seething excitations” (Freud, 1933/1988, p. 106).
Freud’s early conception of the mind highlighted the primeval
386
CARR & LAPP
energies within the unconscious and the manner in which those
energies were contained and released. Some of his disciples such as
Wilhelm Reich and Otto Gross, were of the view that the aim of
analysis was all about releasing these primeval energies in the best
interests of the mental health of their patients. In some quarters of
society, this early conception of the mind and the aim of analysis are
ones that persist today. In the early 1920s, Freud’s clinical
experience led him to conclude that the structure of the mind and its
dynamic processes were a little more complicated. The emphasis
changed from viewing the mind from the point of view of the id to one
that appreciated the manner in which the ego sought to manage the
demands of the id and other demands within the psyche. This revised
or modified view of the mind, sometimes called Freud’s second
theory or model of the mind, was clearly articulated in his work The
Ego and the Id (Freud, 1923/1984). It is in this model that we find
the now famous topography in which the provinces of the mind are
dubbed the id, ego and super-ego. The terminology and presumed
structure of this second model of the mind is one that many of the
schools of psychodynamics assume and at the same time, are
aspects onto which many seek to graft their own ideas or are points
from which they take their departure.
Freud continued to view the id as the cauldron in which primal
instinctual drives competed for expression. The id is entirely in the
realm of the unconscious. The ego is that province of the mind that
uses logic, memory and judgment to appropriately a) satisfy the
demands of the id; b) postpone satisfaction; or c) suppress these
demands. In making such a decision, the ego has to take into
account the reality of the external world and draw upon past, present
and forecasted experiences. Freud called this aspect of the ego’s
functioning as being in accord with a “reality principle” (Freud,
1923/1984, p. 363). Freud (1923/1984, p. 364; see also Freud,
1933/1988, pp. 109-110) described the ego’s functioning in relation
to the id, as follows:
The functional importance of the ego is manifested in the fact
that normal control over the approaches to motility devolves
upon it. Thus in relation to the id it is like a man on horseback,
who has to hold in check the superior strength of the horse;
with this difference, that the rider tries to do so with his own
strength while the ego uses borrowed forces. Often a rider, if
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
387
he is not to be parted from his horse, is obliged to guide it
where it wants to go; so in the same way the ego is in the
habit of transforming the id’s will into action as it were its own.
Consequently, the ego must also take into account the social
acceptability of carrying through the demands of the id and it is at
this point Freud discusses the province of the mind he called the
super-ego. The super-ego obtains a script about societal rules from
identification with parents and other authority figures. The super-ego
is provided with both a sense of what not to do as well as what
behaviours and aspirations are acceptable or desirable. The latter
positive script is what Freud called an ego-ideal that again, is initially
derived from positive identification with the loving and assuring
parent or parental figures. Throughout one’s life, the ego-ideal is
established and re-established through the process of identification.
Thus, the super-ego functions in both a positive and negative manner:
in as much as it performs the role of censor to the options and wishes
of the ego, it also acts to direct the ego to an idealized self to which
the individual aspires. From Freud’s new perspective, looking at the
manner in which the mind is managed -- that is from the point of view
of the ego -- failure to meet the demands and restrictions voiced by
the super-ego results in “punishment” in the form of anxiety, guilt and
shame, if the ego fails to properly manage its own house:
Thus the ego, driven by the id, confined by the super-ego,
repulsed by reality, struggles to master its economic task ... If
the ego is obliged to admit its weakness, it breaks out in
anxiety -- realistic anxiety regarding the external world, moral
anxiety regarding the super-ego and neurotic anxiety regarding
the strength of the passions of the id. (Freud 1933/1988, pp.
110-111)
Excessive and unresolved conflict between the ego and other
provinces of the mind may result in a variety of pathologies such as
phobias, hysteria, manic depression and paranoia. The intra-psychic
conflict is what the ego must manage and it is in the context of
managing such conflicts and avoiding potential conflicts that the ego
may engage a variety of defence mechanisms, many of which have
become part of our everyday language. Examples are repression (i.e.,
the omnipresent defense that usually accompanies all other defence
mechanisms),
regression,
denial,
projection,
sublimation,
rationalisation, and identification. These mechanisms largely operate
388
CARR & LAPP
in the realm of the unconscious and are engaged by the ego to deal
with potential painful, threatening situations. Under the influence of
these defense mechanisms, the potential or actual source of anxiety
gets deflected, distorted or denied from the conscious mind.
However, these repressed memories still remain active in the
unconscious to influence behaviour without the individual’s
necessarily being aware of the origins of his own reactions. It is
Freud’s tools of analysis that opened the pathway to these repressed
memories. In rendering them conscious, there was the potential to
free the patient from a compulsion or behaviour derived from this
unconscious material. The tools of analysis are the pathway to
repressed memories through the interpretation of dreams that Freud
called “the royal road to a knowledge of unconscious activities of the
mind” (1900/1986, p. 769).
The discovery of the active nature of the unconscious and his
dynamic model of the mind are but part of Freud’s major
contributions to the world of psychology and more generally, the
social sciences. In the papers that follow, other contributions from
Freud’s work and those psychodynamic theorists who take points of
departure from his work, will be discussed. Of course the work of
Freud and his disciples has extended beyond the consultation room
and has been applied to understanding the behaviour of groups,
leadership, religion, art and so forth. Before discussing the papers in
this special issue, it is appropriate to make a few observations as to
the manner in which psychodynamic insights have indeed extended
beyond the consultation room into the world of organization studies.
Psychodynamics and Organizations
Much of the vocabulary of psychodynamics may be part of
everyday language, but the uptake of the ideas from this body of work
to the field of organization studies has been less than spectacular. By
being special, “Special Issue” volumes of journals are often a signal
of them being that they address a topic that is not mainstream.
Notwithstanding, it has been in more recent years that a number of
special issues on psychodynamics and organization studies have
surfaced (e.g., Adams & Diamond, 1999; Carr, 2002a; Carr & Gabriel,
2001a; Carr & Hancock, 2007; de Swarte, 1998; Downs, Durant &
Eastman, 2002). This may be indicative of a renewed general interest
in psychodynamics and/ or might suggest that the most
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
389
contemporary issues arising in organization studies commend
themselves to a psychodynamic understanding. Certainly the
relatively high number of internet downloads of articles appearing in
those special issues would seem to indicate a renewed interest, as
would a high level of citation. In our view, those who seek to apply the
insights of psychodynamics to the world of organization studies do
offer something different in the way of understanding traditional
topics such as leadership, followership, group behaviour, authority
and organisational studies in general. Psychodynamics does bring
into focus aspects of those topics that are otherwise inadequately
addressed by more behaviourist and cognitivist approaches to
understanding forms of behaviour in organizations. In particular,
psychodynamics draws attention to the non-rational, emotional,
symbolic and discursive aspects in the world of organizations.
Types of Psychodynamic Study
When discussing groups and the behaviour of individuals within
larger organizations, Freud (1921/1985) argued that group
psychology was really an extension of individual psychology. Indeed,
Peter Gay (1988), who wrote a biography of Freud, tried to summarise
Freud’s position on the extent of this relationship by describing group
psychology as "parasitic on individual psychology" (p. 405). For
example, Freud asserted that the notion of "the ego ideal opens up
an important avenue for the understanding of group psychology"
(1914/1984, p. 96). He later explained the details of this linkage by
suggesting that through the process of identification, the individual
surrenders the current "ego ideal and substitutes for it the group ideal
as embodied in the leader (p. 161) ... (the group members) put one
and the same object in place of their ego ideal and have
consequently identified themselves with one another in their ego"
(Freud, 1921/1985, pp. 161 & 147). In another one of his works (i.e,
this time when trying to make sense of war, religion, behaviour in
groups and other aspects of civilization), Freud (1935/1986)
remarked:
I perceive even more clearly that the events of human history,
the interactions between human nature, cultural development
and the precipitates of primeval experiences are no more than
a reflection of the dynamic conflict between the ego, the id
and the super-ego, which psychoanalysis studies in the
390
CARR & LAPP
individual - are the very same processes, repeated upon a
wider stage. (p. 257)
The notion of group psychology being intimately related to the
psychodynamic processes and structural realms of the mind put
forward in individual psychology is a matter that may give readers
who are less familiar with psychodynamics an inkling as to why we
thought it wise to provide some basic terminology in the previous
section on the topography of the mind. Notwithstanding, of course
there are other psychodynamic processes that arise in groups that
are not explained in individual psychology, but these are additive
constructs that, as we will see in the papers that follow, use a similar
vocabulary.
In some previous introductions to special issues (Carr, 2002a;
Carr & Gabriel, 2001b; Gabriel & Carr, 2002), it is noted that in broad
terms, those who employ the lens of psychodynamics in relation to
organizations and the behaviours of those within organizations, have
done so principally from one of two directions. Some are interested in
the manner in which organizations -- through their structuring, design,
organizational processes and management -- impact upon the
emotional lives and behaviours of individuals. This group seeks to
explain the impact in reference to psychodynamic processes and
alert us to how those unconscious processes are subject to
manipulation and broader social influence.
In this approach, authors and researchers have been quick to
draw upon the work of social theorists such as Herbert Marcuse
(1955, 1964, 1970) and those of various critical schools to reveal
how the social and cultural milieu impact is carried
psychodynamically. Mainly, the topics of interest to this group have
been identity, leadership, followership, power, authority, group
dynamics, ethics, culture, motivation, conflict, rationality, emotion,
psychological contracts, politics, storytelling, and roles. According to
these theorists, all of these themes “acquire a deeper meaning,
almost an extra dimension, when enriched with psychodynamic
insights” (Carr & Gabriel, 2001b, p. 417). This approach can be
summarised as being one that seeks to study organizations
psychodynamically. Among others, those who have taken such an
approach include Carr (1993, 1994, 1998; Carr & Downs, 2005; Carr
& Lapp, 2005a-d, 2006a-c, 2007, in press; Carr & Zanetti, 1999); La
Bier (1983, 1986); Lapp (Lapp & Carr, 2005, 2006a-d, 2007a-b, in
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
391
press, 2008); Maccoby (1976, 2003); Schwartz (1987, 1990); and
Sievers (1990, 1994).
Another approach that has employed the lens of psychodynamics
in relation to organizations and the behaviour of those within
organizations, is one that can be described as putting organizations
on the couch or “psychoanalysing” organizations. The difference
between this approach and that of studying organizations
psychodynamically is one of degree. Psychoanalysing organizations”
has a very pragmatic and interventionist agenda. The group of
theorists who have championed this approach regard organizations
and those dysfunctional people within them, much like a patient
seeking and needing help from a therapist. The energies of this group
of scholars are to make a diagnosis of what ails the organization and
then put into place assisting interventions. Some of those who have
taken such an approach include Diamond (1993); French and Vince,
(1999); Hirschhorn (1988, 1999); Jacques (1952); Kets de Vries
(1991); Krantz (1989, 1990); Levinson (1972); Menzies-Lyth (1988);
Obholzer (1999); Stein (1998); and Zaleznik (1977, 1989).
While the distinction between these two approaches might be
considered reductionist and some of the theorists involved have
contributed to both approaches, the distinction is nonetheless
apparent in a reading of the literature. Gabriel and Carr (2002)
provided examples of where the approaches do differ on some
issues. Most notably these are on the topics of psychic and
organizational conflict. Studying organisations psychodynamically
regards some forms of conflict as originating beyond the individual
organization because they originate in the structuring and socioeconomic environment in which the organization is immersed. Thus,
any kind of therapeutic intervention or changes are simply adaptive
strategies that do not really remove the sources of conflict and their
consequential neurotic symptoms, anxieties and dysfunctional
behaviours. This is akin to assisting a normal person to adapt to a
sick working environment (see Carr, 1993; La Bier, 1986; Maccoby,
1976). Further, this group would suggest it is no surprise that such
conflicts and resultant neuroses are encountered. Indeed, and as has
been previously noted, Freud (1933/1988) himself suggested that
“The expectation that every neurotic phenomenon can be cured may,
I suspect be derived from the layman’s belief that the neuroses are
something quite unnecessary which have no right whatever to exist”
(p. 189; see also Gabriel & Carr, 2002, p. 353). In contrast, the group
392
CARR & LAPP
that put the organization on the couch to psychoanalyse
organisations might alternatively suggest that such conflicts emerge
from poor managerial processes and/or certain neuroses of those in
leadership positions in the organization and are thus always capable
of being “cured”. Notwithstanding the differences that have just been
identified, these approaches enjoy much that is in common and the
papers that follow are illustrative of this point. We now turn our
attention to a summary of these papers.
The Papers in this Special Issue
The first paper in this special issue is by Cheryl Lapp and Adrian
Carr and is entitled Compromising positions: The psychodynamics of
the death instinct’s influence on organizational conflict management.
The authors discuss how we might comprehend the important issue
of conflict development and mitigation in organisations. For Lapp and
Carr, a clear understanding of how conflict arises and can be
managed in organizations, is to be gleaned from understanding the
psychodynamics processes associated with the life instinct, Eros, and
the death instinct, Thanatos.
Along with his topography of the ego, super-ego and id, Freud
(1920/1984, 1923/1984) also suggested that in the id reside the
two classes of instincts, Eros and Thanatos. Eros is comprised of life
affirming aspects such as life, sex and self-preservation. Eros
dialectic opposite, Thanatos consists of destructive urges such as
masochism (i.e., inwardly directed hostility) and sadism (i.e. outwardly
directed hostility). By revealing and discussing both Sigmund Freud’s
(1921/1984, 1923/1984) and Melanie Klein’s (1975a-d) renditions
of the death instinct at work, Lapp and Carr find that Thanatos is
purely a destructive instinct. In regard to conflict development, the
death instinct reveals itself when an individual must compromise but
with the result of losing more than is gained. According to terror
management theory (Solomon, Greenberg & Pyszczynski, 1998)
compromise generates feelings of dying because one has to
relinquish part of her or his worldview, the self-preservation of which
was life affirming. It is unwanted change to worldviews that put the
individual first, in a masochistic state where anxiety, guilt and shame
are directed at the self. Since these effects are unwanted, they are
then projected into others in the form of sadistic acts. The importance
of Lapp and Carr’s work here is that they have uncovered and
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
393
synthesised from this literature that the death instinct, as it combats
the life instinct, reveals itself in a process of iterative destructive
behaviours such that the aim of all life is death (Freud, 1920/1984,
p. 311).
However, Lapp and Carr also bring to the foreground the work of
psychoanalysts Sabina Spielrein (1912/1994) and Thomas Ogden
(1989) who believe the death instinct works in the service of calling
forward life instincts in destructive-reconstructive events such that
the aim of all death is life (Carr & Lapp, 2006a; Spielrein,
1912/1994). The process of dying might be felt to be a painful and
horrible event but what also must be considered is that change brings
forward both positive and negative synthesis. Lapp and Carr use
Spielrein’s and Ogden’s work to note where in both individual and
group organisational behaviours Thanatos can be seen to be a
positive influence in workplace life. By discussing the work of C. Fred
Alford (1994), Lapp and Carr demonstrate: a) how Eros and Thanatos
work in dialectical processes; b) why the process of mourning is
essential to the management of mortality salience and worldview
change; c) the dynamics of intra and interpersonal conflict
development; and, d) why high-level compromise might be the
penultimate conflict resolution method such that the concept of
collaboration is merely the feeling state of a good compromise. A
most important corollary of this paper is the views that death must
form the framework for life and vice versa; the more we defend
ourselves against death, the more we protect ourselves from
experiencing life.
An individual’s and organization’s self-preservation strategies are
also fixtures in the following piece. The next paper in this special
issue is entitled Organization and meaning: A multilevel
psychoanalytic treatment of the Jayson Blair scandal at the New York
Times. The authors of this paper, Howard Schwartz and Larry
Hirschhorn, recount the story of Jayson Blair who was a reporter at
The New York Times who was found to have plagiarized some of his
stories and fabricated some of his sources. Schwartz and Hirschhorn
examine Blair’s behaviour, and that of the Times, through the lens of
Freud’s theory on the Oedipus complex and the possible counterpart,
anti-Oedipal meaning. For the authors of this paper, psychoanalytic
theory is firmly about symbolism and the emergence of meaning. It is
this feature of psychoanalytic theory that Schwartz and Hirschhorn
argue commends psychoanalytic theory to what they describe as
394
CARR & LAPP
“cross-level analysis” (i.e., behaviour at the levels of individual, group
and organization).
Schwartz and Hirschhorn accept Freud’s topography of the mind
and his theory of the Oedipus complex -- a complex originating from
the story of Oedipus Rex. In this story, the child has a desire for the
parent of the opposite sex and for the demise of the parent of the
same sex who is seen as a rival. According to Freud, this complex is
experienced between the ages of three and five years. In the case of
the male child, it is normally resolved through the super-ego
reminding the child of the authority of the father. When it is not
appropriately resolved, it can persevere into adulthood. A form of
regressive behaviour associated with this psychosexual development
may be displayed. In the case of the male it may manifest itself in
character in the form of an over concern for masculinity and displays
of brashness (see Laplanche & Pontalis, 1967/1988, pp. 35-36,
282-287). In our view, Schwartz and Hirschhorn note correctly that
this complex is culturally contingent and that in some circumstances
the authority of the father is not accepted and one may seek to reestablish the connection with the mother -- an anti-Oedipal dynamic.
The important issue that arises from the work of Schwartz and
Hirschhorn is an explanation of how these dynamics explain certain
behaviour at levels of the individual, group and organization. It is the
clash of Oedipal and anti-Oedipal meanings in the world around us
that Schwartz and Hirschhorn reveal are crucial in interpreting the
case of Jayson Blair and the dynamics that occurred at the Times. In
the face of these competing meanings, we gain further clarity of the
actual ground that is being taken by each position. It is the
understanding of symbolic content that Schwartz and Hirschhorn
reveal is the common thread to understanding behaviour at multiple
levels and gives us a better insight into behaviours in organizations
including but not limited to authority and meaning.
The issues of authority and meaning are also a central
consideration in the next paper, Social defence structures in
organizations. Adopting a “systems psychodynamic perspective”, the
authorsRené van Eeden and Frans Cilliers examine the functioning of
a management team in a production company in South Africa. The
terminology “systems psychodynamic perspective” is used to denote
an approach that specifically recognises the fact that structural
features of the organization have the potential to stimulate individual
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
395
and group responses that may in turn result in clarification of certain
boundaries and roles within an organization -- ultimately this may lead
to shaping the culture within the organization.
The interactive nature of structure and its relationship with the
construction of meaning for those in the organization is a dynamic
that is at the forefront of this system’s psychodynamic perspective.
Van Eeden and Cilliers are particularly interested in the manner in
which groups within the work organization create, mobilise and
employ certain psychological and behavioural defences in the face of
anxiety posed by certain structural features of the organization and
management processes. The actual strengthening of individual
defences through group behaviour is explored, and particularly, the
manner in which certain assumptions and expectations are placed
upon the leader. The management of personal and organization
boundaries, a major feature of systems theory, is a key matter in the
psychodynamic management of anxiety. The circumstances in which
individuals and groups feel a need to erect boundaries and to utilize
boundaries created by the organization, such as hierarchy and duty
statements, is instructive to those who seek to lead and manage
groups. In particular, an understanding of how unconsciously leaders
and managers can be drawn into boundary construction for groups is
an important consideration for any leader to be self-aware. The case
study analysis reveals a raft of unconscious dynamics that have
broad implications for what is effective in leadership behaviour.
The matter of leadership theory is one that Pete Mann and Jon
Chapman discuss in the next paper in this issue. Posing the question
Can an American psychotherapeutic system contribute to British
leadership development? these authors reflect upon their own
experience, and that of some ten of their fellow British colleagues
being trained in the American Pesso-Boyden System Psychomotor
(PBSP) method of adult reparative growth. At first blush this may
seem somewhat irrelevant to the world of behaviour in organizations
except this was training for practitioners and consultants in
leadership development. Mann and Chapman interviewed six
consultants in leadership development and one Managing Director to
ascertain what benefits PBSP training may hold for them personally
and for leadership development.
Although we will not attempt to summarise what is involved in the
PBSP method, it should be noted that a central idea derived from the
396
CARR & LAPP
work of Freud is that earlier in life experiences do leave a memory
trace and certain predispositions to responses in adult life. The focus
upon how these earlier in life experiences get socially re-enacted in
the present is very significant in learning how a leader may simply
and unconsciously act-out or project that inner history. The
identification of these inner dynamics is important if a mature
reconsideration of leadership behaviour is to ensue. The mind-body
connection of these earlier experiences is seen as significant in
opening reflection into leadership behaviour -- a type of re-wiring of
the brain in a process of co-creation with the consultant/trainer such
that the inner purpose and meaning that act to motivate are changed.
Change motivation is a connecting concept to the next paper in
this issue, entitled Pop-management: Tales of passion, power and
profit. The authors, Ana Paula Paes de Paula and Thomas Wood Jr,
make a compelling case that there are parallels between fairytales
and stories conveyed in pop-management literature. For this special
issue, the significance of this finding lies in the fact that the authors
are able to identify not just structural similarities and similar
elements -- such as heroes, villains and happy endings -- but that
similar psychodynamic processes are being enacted in management
stories as they are in fairytales. The psychodynamics that are
implicated and tapped-into in conveying a story is an important
contemporary issue because not only does the pop-management
literature seek to impart a story, but much of the recent fad for
management coaching is replete with stories and storytelling.
Of course many would be aware that the management literature
on storytelling is increasing. Perhaps less known and less discussed
are the unconscious psychodynamics that are being employed in
getting people to accept the stories being told. Moreover, much of the
management literature about stories and storytelling treat stories as
though they are simply neutral objects rather than explore the
manner in which the story and dialogue is constructed to convince
the listener to accept the story. This latter concern takes us into the
realm of understanding the psychodynamics that are at play in the
telling of the story. We think the term “selling” (see Carr & Lapp,
2005d, 2006c; Lapp & Carr, 2007b) is more apt for much of what
has passed as storytelling and thus we have tended to distinguish the
two activities through the use of the term storyselling. The paper by
Paes de Paula and Wood also concludes with a plea for the field of
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
397
organization studies to undertake a more careful reading of stories in
organizations such that we come to understand the psychodynamics
that are at play and the manner in which various themes from
fairytales, and earlier- in- life experiences, are significant.
We noted earlier that psychodynamics is a family of different
schools of inquiry in which the unconscious is seen as key to
understanding human behaviour. In the next paper in this issue,
Thibault de Swarte and Alain Amintas draw upon the work of Jacques
Lacan and Michel Foucault in juxtaposition to the work of sociological
theorists of organizations. In their paper entitled From sociology of
organizations to organizational psychoanalysis: A genealogical
approach of a high tech company, de Swarte and Amintas argue that
the work of sociologists has inspired an emphasis upon instrumental
rationality in our thinking about organizations and that this emphasis
is misplaced. In our attempts to make sense of behaviour in
organizations, they argue, a greater emphasis and recognition needs
to be placed upon “signifiers and the roles of the unconscious
process inside organizations”. It is in the context of this latter focus
that the authors of this paper employ the work of Lacan and Foucault.
Lacan placed much emphasis upon the significance of language
and at various stages indeed argued that the unconscious could be
regarded as having a language-like structure that comes into being
because of language itself. Lacan’s work is very dense and at times
convoluted but in general his work represents a move away from
those who emphasised Freud’s biological underpinning of the mind.
Lacan emphasized the earlier work of Freud, such as The
Interpretation of Dreams (Freud, 1900/1986), in which social and
cultural factors are considered more central to the reading of
behaviour and to the manner in which the mind becomes organised.
For Lacan, the dream is in fact not a series of pictures but is text. In
reading texts Lacan drew attention to the unstable or non-fixed
nature of the relationship of the word (the signifier) to the concept
that is conveyed (the signified). It is the ambiguity of this relationship
that de Swarte and Amintas highlight in the analysis of their case
study. They suggest an alternative to traditional concepts of how
organizations function and the interpretation of behaviour within
them.
The last paper includes interpretation of an employee’s
behaviour. The special issue concludes with a paper by the editors
398
CARR & LAPP
that is entitled: Encapsulation: Expatriates inside a complex world
and draws upon the works of Freud, Klein and Alford to explore some
fundamental paradoxes that are psychologically encountered by
personnel who are deployed overseas by their company. The
paradoxes are that these personnel have to adapt to their new
environment (i.e., that is, co-create variety) while at the same time
retaining that “stability” that makes up their identity. The subsequent
paradox of retaining a distance and resisting the complexity of the
outside environment is that the more one is open to perceived
attacks from that which comprises such variety, the more closed he
or she becomes to adaptability. The paper suggests that leadership of
the parent organization is key to the success of the expatriate.
Similar to discussions of the Oedipal complex, this paper
concludes that the home organisation realise its leaders could act as
parents in order to hold the expatriate at acceptable distances from
isolation and engulfment. When expatriates are not held
appropriately, one effect is encapsulation, a layering series of
psychodynamic events that make the individual feel as if he or she is
at the centre of a psychodynamic Russian doll. To escape, the
expatriate attempts to act out. In the case study presented in this
paper, attempts are inappropriate and result in the employee’s being
fired from the company -- even though the parent company was
remiss by holding the expatriate in isolation. The more acting out
contravenes organisational and cultural ideals, the more the
individual becomes, unwittingly and unconsciously, encapsulated.
Collectively these papers provide a glimpse into a psychodynamic
appreciation of behaviour in organizations. It is our hope that this
special issue might inspire others to add to this body of knowledge.
REFERENCES
Adams, G. B., & Diamond, M. A. (Eds.) (1999). “Psychodynamic
Perspectives on Organizations: Identity, Politics and Change.”
American Behavioral Scientist, 43 (2, Special Issue): 221-345.
Alford, C. F. (1994). Group Psychology and Political Theory. New
Haven, CT: Yale University.
Basbøll, T. (2005, Dec. 21). “Getting Organisational. Theory off the
Couch.” [Online]. Available at http://thecurrentevent.blogspot.
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
com/2005/12/getting-org-theory-off-couch.html.
January 15, 2006).
399
(Retrieved
Carr, A. N. (1993). “The Psychostructure Of Work: ‘Bend Me, Shape
Me, Anyway You Want Me, As Long As You Love Me It's Alright.’”
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 8 (6): 3-6.
Carr, A. N. (1994). “For self or Others?: The Quest for Narcissism and
the Ego-Ideal in Work Organisations.” Administrative Theory &
Praxis, 16 (2): 208-222.
Carr, A. N. (1998). “Identity, Compliance and Dissent in
Organisations: A Psychoanalytic Perspective. Organization, 5 (1):
81-89.
Carr, A. N. (Ed.) (2002a). “Managing in a Psychoanalytically Informed
Manner.” Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17 (5, Special Issue):
339-434.
Carr, A. N. (2002b). “Managing in a Psychoanalytically Informed
Manner (Introduction).” Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(5,
Special Issue): 343-347.
Carr, A. N., & Downs, A. (2005). “Enron: Taking our Cue from the
World of Object Relations.” Tamara: Journal of Critical
Postmodern Science, 3 (2): 1-15.
Carr, A. N., & Gabriel, Y. (Eds.) (2001a). “The Psychodynamics of
Organizational Change Management.” Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 14 (5, Special Issue): 411-503.
Carr, A. N., & Gabriel, Y. (2001b). “The Psychodynamics of
Organizational Change Management.” Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 14 (5): 415-420.
Carr, A. N., & Hancock, P. (2007). “The art and aesthetics of the
unconscious. Special Issue, Tamara Journal for Critical
Organization Inquiry, 6 (1): 1-106.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2005a, March). “Holding Patterns: A
Psychodynamic Review of the Death Instinct in Organizational
Change.” Paper Presented to the Western Decision Science
Institute, 34th Annual Meeting, March 22-26, Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada.
400
CARR & LAPP
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2005b). “A Case of ‘Acting out the Missing
Leader’: Understanding Aspects of the Psychodynamics of Group
Identity.” Journal of Postmodern Organization Science (TAMARA),
5 (5): 1-20.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2005c, July 4-6). ”Falling in Love with
Investments: A Psychoanalytic Review of the Death Instinct in
Critical Management of Organizational Relationships.” In C.
Gibson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th International Critical
Management Conference, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.
[Online].
Available
at
http://www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/research/ejrot/
cmsconference/2005/proceedings.asp.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2005d). ”Wanted for Breaking and Entering
Organisational Systems in Complexity: Eros and Thanatos.”
Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and
Management, 7(3 & 4): 43-52.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2006a). Leadership Is a Matter of Life and
Death: The Psychodynamics of Eros and Thanatos Working in
Organisations. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2006b). ’Modern Madness’ (Examining the
Dark-Side
of
Competition
Through
the
Optics
of
Psychodynamics)”. Paper Presented at the 23rd International
Society for the Psychoanalytic Study of Organizations Annual
Meeting, June 19-25, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. [Online].
Available at www.ispso.org/Symposia/symposia.htm
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2006c). ”Wanted for Breaking and Entering
Organisational Systems in Complexity: Eros and Thanatos.” In K.
Richardson, D. Snowden, J. A. Goldstein & P. M. Allen (Eds.),
Emergence: Complexity & Organization (pp. 89-104). Mansfield,
MA: ISCE Publishing.
Carr, A. N., & Lapp, C. A. (2007). As Leadership Dies: Cases of
Individual and Group Identity Destruction and Construction.” In D.
Sims, N. Beech & A. Pullen (Eds.), Psychoanalytic Approaches to
Identity (pp. 100-134). Hampshire, UK. Palgrave Macmillan.
Carr, A. N., & Zanetti, L. A. (1999). “Metatheorising the Dialectics of
Self and Other: The Psychodynamics in Work Organizations.”
American Behavioral Scientist, 43 (2): 324-345.
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
401
Diamond, M. (1993). The Unconscious Life of Organizations:
Interpreting Organizational Identity. London, UK: Quorum.
Downs, A., Durant, R., & Eastman, K. (Eds.) (2002). “Jung’s Legacy
and Beyond: Exploring the Relevance of Archetypal Psychology to
Organizational Change.” Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 15 (5, Special Issue): 440-546.
English, H. B., & English, A. C. (1966). A Comprehensive Dictionary of
Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms (2nd ed.). New York:
David McKay. (Original work published 1958)
French, R., & Vince, R. (Eds.) (1999). Group Relations, Management,
and Organization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.
Freud, S. (1984). “On Narcissism: An Introduction.” In J. Strachey (Ed.
and Trans.), On Metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis
(Vol. 11, pp. 59-97). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work
published 1914)
Freud, S. (1984). “The Unconscious.” In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.),
On Metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis (Vol. 11, pp.
159-222). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work published
1915).
Freud, S. (1984). “Beyond the Pleasure Principle.” In J. Strachey (Ed.
and Trans.), On Metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis
(Vol. 11, pp. 269-338). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original
work published 1920).
Freud, S. (1984). “The Ego and the ID.” In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.),
On metapsychology: The Theory of Psychoanalysis (Vol. 11, pp.
339-408). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work published
1923).
Freud, S. (1985). “Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego.” In
J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), Civilization, Society and Religion (Vol.
12, pp. 91-178). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work
published 1921).
Freud, S. (1986). The Interpretation of Dreams (J. Strachey, Ed. and
Trans.). Vol. 4. Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work
published 1900).
Freud, S. (1986). The claims of psychoanalysis to scientific interest.
In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), Historical and Expository Works on
402
CARR & LAPP
Psychoanalysis (Vol. 15, pp. 29-58). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican.
(Original work published 1913).
Freud, S. (1986). “Postscript (to An Autobiographical Study).” In J.
Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), Historical and Expository Works on
Psychoanalysis (Vol. 15, pp. 256-259). Harmondsworth, UK:
Pelican. (Original work published 1935).
Freud, S. (1986). “An Outline of Psychoanalysis.” In J. Strachey (Ed.
and Trans.), Historical and Expository Works on Psychoanalysis
(Vol. 15, pp. 371-443). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original
work published 1940).
Freud, S. (1986). “An Autobiographical Study.” In J. Strachey (Ed. and
Trans.), Historical and Expository Works on Psychoanalysis (Vol.
15, pp. 185-255). Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work
published 1924-1925).
Freud, S. (1988). New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (J.
Strachey, Ed. and Trans.) Vol. 2. Pelican Freud Library,
Harmondsworth, England: Pelican. (Original work published
1933)
Freud, S. (1991). “Parapraxes.” In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.),
Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (Vol. 1, pp. 39-108).
Harmondsworth, UK: Pelican. (Original work published 1915).
Gabriel, Y., & Carr, A. N. (2002). “Organizations, Management and
Psychoanalysis: An Overview.” Journal of Managerial Psychology,
17 (5): 348-365.
Gay, P. (1988). Freud: A life for our Time. London, UK: Macmillian.
Hewett, E. (1889). Elements of Psychology. Cincinnati, OH: Eclectic.
Hirschhorn, L. (1988). The Workplace within. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Hirschhorn, L. (1999). “The Primary Risk.” Human Relations, 52 (1):
5-23.
Jaques, E. (1952). The changing culture of the factory. London:
Tavistock.
Jones, E. (1953). Sigmund Freud, life and Work: The Young Freud,
1856-1900 (Vol. 1). London, UK: Hogarth.
Kets de Vries, M. (Ed.), (1991). Organizations on the Couch. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
403
Klein, M. (1975a). The Writings of Melanie Klein I: 'Love, Guilt and
Reparation' and other Works 1921-1945. London, UK: Hogarth.
Klein, M. (1975b). The Writings of Melanie Klein II: The
Psychoanalysis of Children. London, UK: Hogarth.
Klein, M. (1975c). The Writings of Melanie Klein III: 'Envy and
Gratitude' and other Works 1946-1963. London, UK: Hogarth.
Klein, M. (1975d). The Writings of Melanie Klein IV: Narrative of a
Child Analysis. London, UK: Hogarth.
Krantz, J. (1989). “The Managerial Couple: Superior-Subordinate
Relationships as a Unit of Analysis.” Human Resource
Management, 28 (2): 161-176.
Krantz, J. (1990). Lessons from the Field: An Essay on the Crisis of
Leadership in Contemporary Organizations.” Journal of Applied
Behavioural Science, 26 (1): 49-64.
La Bier, D. (1983). “Emotional Disturbance in the Federal
Government.” Administration and Society, 14 (4): 403-448.
La Bier, D. (1986). Modern Madness: The Emotional Fallout of
Success. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Laplanche, J., & Pontalis, J. (1988). The Language of Psycho-Analysis
(D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). London, UK: Karnac. (Original work
published 1967)
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2005). “Escalating Mores: Eleytherias i
Thanatos.” In C. Gustafsson, A. Rehn & D. Sköld (Eds.), Excess &
organization (pp. 118-138). Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute
of Technology.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2006a). “Binding Economics: Giving
Organizations the Right to Coerce.” In H. Kantarelis and D,
Kantarelis (Eds.), The Business & Economics Society
International, Anthology (pp. 575-590). Worcester, MA: B&ESI.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2006b). “Mirror, Mirror on the Wal:
Reflections on the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Them All.” In R.
ten Bos and R. Kaulingfreks (Eds.), The Good, the Bad and the
Ugly: Organizations and Demons (pp. 375-398). Nijmegen,
Holland: Radboud University Press. [Online]. Available at
www.scos.org/ page6/assets/2006%20proceedings.pdf.
404
CARR & LAPP
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2006c). “The Psychodynamics of Critical
Distance.” Tamara Journal for Critical Organization Study, 5 (2):
137-158.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2006d). “To Have to Halve to Have: ‘Being’
in the Middle in Changing Time’s Space.” Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 19 (5): 655-687.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2007a, April 2-6). “Coaching: Potential and
Limits of Management by Metaphor.” In B. Raymond and K.
Leong (Eds.), The Western Decision Sciences Institute (WDSI)
Proceedings (pp. 145-156). Denver, CO: Western Decision
Sciences Institute.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (2007b). “The Dialectics of Storytelling and
Storyselling: Sometimes the Facts Get in the Way of the Story.” In
Proceedings of the 5th International Critical Management Studies
Conference, Manchester University, 11-13th July. [Online].
Available
at
www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/ejrot/cmsconference/2007/
proceedings/emergentstory/lappcarr.pdf.
Lapp, C. A., & Carr, A. N. (in press 2009). “Simple storyselling: Doing
the Splits.” In D. Boje & K. Baskin (Eds.). Dancing to the Music of
Storytelling.
Levinson, H. (1972). Organizational Diagnosis. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University.
Maccoby, M. (1976). The Gamesman. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Maccoby, M. (2003). The Productive Narcissist: The Promise and Peril
Of Visionary Leadership. New York: Broadway Books.
Marcuse, H. (1955). Eros and Civilization. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Marcuse, H. (1964) One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of
Advanced Industrial Society. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan
Paul.
Marcuse, H. (1970). Five Lectures: Psychoanalysis, Politics and
Utopia (J. Shapiro & S. Weber, Trans.). London, UK: Penguin.
Menzies-Lyth, I. (1988). Containing Anxiety in Institutions: Selected
Essays. London, UK: Free Association.
ORGANIZATION THEORY AND ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR: THROUGH THE LENS OF PSYCHODYNAMICS
405
Obholzer, A. (1999). “Managing the Unconscious at Work.” In R.
French & R. Vince (Eds.), Group Relations, Management, and
Organization (pp. 87-97). Oxford: Oxford University.
Ogden, T. (1989). The Primitive Edge of Experience. Northvale, NJ:
Jason Aronson Inc.
Schwartz, H. (1987). “Anti-Social Actions of Committed Organizational
Participants: An Existential Psychoanalytic Perspective.”
Organization Studies, 8(4), 327-340.
Schwartz, H. (1990). Narcissistic Process and Corporate Decay: The
Theory of the Organization Ideal. New York: New York University.
Sievers, B. (1990). “Thoughts on the Relatedness of Work, Death and
Life Itself.” European Journal of Management, 8(3): 321-324.
Sievers, B. (1994). Work, Death, and Life Itself: Essays on
Management and Organization. New York: de Gruyter.
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J. & Pyszczynski, T. (1998). “Tales from the
Crypt: On the Role of Death in Life.” Zygon, 33 (1): 9-43.
Spielrein, S. (1994). “Destruction as the Cause of Coming into Being.”
Journal of Analytical Psychology, 39 (2): 155-186. (Original work
published 1912)
Stein, H. (1998). Euphemism, Spin, and the Crisis in Organizational
Life. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Swarte, (de) T. (1998). “Psychoanalysis and Management.” Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 13 (7, Special Issue): 459-517.
Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?
Harvard Business Review, 55: 47-60.
Zaleznik, A. (1989). The Managerial Mystique. NY: Harper and Row.