Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:25:25.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Still Too POSH to Push for Structural Change? The Need for a Macropsychology Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2017

Malcolm MacLachlan
Malcolm MacLachlan*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Maynooth University
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Malcolm MacLachlan, Department of Psychology, Maynooth University, County Kildare, Ireland. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

My mother, who lived her early years in the British Raj in India, assures me that POSH referred to the well-to-do European's wish to travel “Port Out, Starboard Home” on ships to and from India, which meant enjoying the predominantly shaded side of the ship, protected from the ravaging heat that “ordinary” folk had to endure. What an apt, provocative, and profound analogy Gloss, Carr, Reichman, Abdul-Nasiru, and Oestereich (2017) have given us in their description of the primary focus of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology on “Professional, Official, Secure, and High income” work.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 403 - 407
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amin, M., MacLachlan, M., Mannan, H., El Tayeb, S., El Khatim, A., Swartz, L., . . . Schneider, M. (2011). EquiFrame: A framework for analysis of the inclusion of human rights and vulnerable groups in health policies. Health & Human Rights, 13 (2), 1–20.Google Scholar
Clark, D. A. (2009). Adaptation, poverty and well-being: Some issues and observations with special reference to the capability approach and development studies. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10, 21–42. doi: 10.1080/14649880802675051 Google Scholar
Dean, H. (2009). Critiquing capabilities: The distractions of a beguiling concept. Critical Social Policy, 29 (2), 261–273. doi: 10.1177/0261018308101629 Google Scholar
Department for International Development (DFID). (2009). Political economy analysis: How to note. London: Department for International Development.Google Scholar
Gloss, A., Carr, S. C., Reichman, W., Abdul-Nasiru, I., & Oesterich, W. T. (2017). From handmaidens to POSH humanitarians: The case for making human capabilities the business of I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10 (3), 329–369.Google Scholar
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.Google Scholar
MacLachlan, M. (2014). Macropsychology, policy, and global health. American Psychologist, 69, 851–863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacLachlan, M., Carr, S. C., & Mc Auliffe, E. (2010). The aid triangle: Recognizing the human dynamics of dominance, justice and identity. London: Zed.Google Scholar
MacLachlan, M., Mji, G., Chataika, T., Wazakili, M., Dube, A. K., Mulumba, M., . . . Maughan, M. (2014). Facilitating disability inclusion in poverty reduction processes: Group consensus perspectives from disability stakeholders in Uganda, Malawi, Ethiopia, and Sierra Leone. Disability & the Global South, 1 (1), 107–127.Google Scholar
McNeilly, K. (2016). After the critique of rights: For a radical democratic theory and practice of human rights. Law & Critique, 27 (3), 269–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pratto, F., Stewart, A. L., & Zeineddine, F. B. (2013). When inequality fails: Power, group dominance, and societal change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1, 132–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
UN Partnership on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNPRPD). (2016). Connections: Building partnerships for disability rights. New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar