See tekst leidis siinses voos oma koha põhjusel, et minule kättesaadavad juhtimispraktikad erinevatest organisatsioonidest on domineerivalt (PS! Kuna tegu on “tundega”, siis võin eksida ja mul ei ole selle vastu midagi) paternalistlikud nii juhtide, ametnike kui horisontaalsel kolleegiliinil. Normatiivsed seisukohad (=kuidas asjad peaksid olema) domineerivad; rääkimine domineerib kuulamise üle …


Its home-like working environment actively fuses private and professional spheres; its employees can readily compare their setting with that of their peers in Silicon Valley, such as people working at Google, a long-standing “best place to work” (Fortune, 2017). […] Contemporary organizations are increasingly relying on engaging work environments that cross the lines between home and office to increase employees’ motivation, loyalty, and productivity. […] Never before has the boundary between office and personal sphere been so porous (Fleming and Spicer, 2004; Perlow, 1998), such that the modern workplace is increasingly designed not just a place to work but also a place to live.


We aim here to understand whether modern, home-like workplaces are truly revolutionary or are simply a new interpretation of classic industrial utopia, signaling a resurgence of paternalism as an organizing principle (i.e. orienting and guiding a person’s or group’s liberty or autonomy with the intention to promote their good; Dworkin, 2010).

Piits ja präänik:

Distinct views of the workplace can help make sense of home-like work environments, which oscillate between a view of the workplace as a manifestation of care for employees, to enhance their well-being and motivation (the carrot), and as a manifestation of control over employees through power relations (the stick).

Pastoraalne võim organisatsioonis:

The concept of pastoral power is embedded in Foucault’s (2008) analysis of “governmentality,” which refers to the ways actors “conduct the conducts.” […] The shepherd cares for, guides, and leads the flock, from birth to death, with the ultimate goal of accomplishing its salvation; a person with pastoral power similarly seeks to modulate conduct, modify the spirit, and mold the will of the guided individual members in a certain directionthat is, to pilot the governed. […] Rather than reigning, ruling, or commanding, governing through pastoral power involves guiding, caring, maintaining constant vigilance, nurturing, protecting, and creating comfortable and safe conditions. Pastoral power, or the “principle of duty to care,” creates a discourse of responsibility and “benevolent” guidance, to provide care for every object of care, or every member of the flock.

Pastoraalse võimutehnoloogia defineerimise neli aspekti:

  1. Question of responsibility: The shepherd assumes responsibility for the destiny of the whole flock and for every individual member, including his or her detailed actions and life.
  2. Question of obedience: A pastoral power relation features dependence and the sense that individual obedience to the will of the shepherd is a virtue and end in itself.
  3. Type of knowledge: Between the shepherd and the flock, knowledge is personal, individualized, and based on self-examination of individual members’ material needs and the guidance of their conscience.
  4. Potential for transformation: This power implies the promise of individual salvation and self-transformation.

Töökoht … koht, kus elada

management in many modern organizations has not only introduced play to work (Kim, 2018; Petelczyc et al., 2018) but also attempted to organize the day-to-day conduct of employees, such that working in such workplaces represents a “lifestyle” or an “art of living” and a way to “conduct the conducts” (Foucault, 1981) producing docile bodies (Foucault, 1991).


We provide here an insightful conceptual framework to make sense of the caring mode of power in modern organizations, as a subtle means of control. Such neo-paternalism, a way to govern and guide, to care for and control employees simultaneously, is expressed by managers in various forms in well-known organizations, in ways that guarantee employees’ autonomy and empowerment but also impose new forms of responsibility, engagement, and constraint.

Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, A. (2021). The new paternalism? The workplace as a place to work—and to live. Organization.