1288544

research-article2024
SAP0010.1177/00812463241288544South African Journal of PsychologyBazana

South African Journal of Psychology 2024, Vol. 54(4) 567­–580 © The Author(s) 2024
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00812463241288544 journals.sagepub.com/home/sap
https://doi.org/10.1177/00812463241288544

Article
Exploring worker subjectivity: shaping
industrial and organizational psychology
in post-apartheid South Africa

Sandiso Bazana

Abstract
This article critically evaluates the role of industrial–organizational psychology in post-apartheid
South Africa, advocating for a transformative framework that addresses the socio-political
and historical inequalities in the workplace. The article highlights how industrial–organizational
psychology has traditionally focused on organizational efficiency, often aligned with capitalist
interests, while overlooking the socio-historical forces shaping worker experiences, particularly
related to race, gender, and class. By introducing the concept of worker subjectivity, the article
calls for a reimagined industrial–organizational psychology that integrates critical perspectives
from psychology and management studies to better understand how workers navigate their
identities and agency within broader socio-political structures. The author emphasizes the
need to address the emotional and psychological dimensions of worker experiences, especially
in the South African context marked by the legacies of colonialism and apartheid. By focusing
on worker subjectivity, industrial–organizational psychology can move beyond traditional
quantitative methods and engage with the complexities of workplace inequality. This approach
aligns industrial–organizational psychology with the broader mission of the Psychological
Society of South Africa to promote socially just and inclusive practices. The article also calls
for interdisciplinary collaboration and the reformation of industrial–organizational psychology
education to better equip practitioners with the tools needed to address the realities of post-
apartheid workplaces.

Keywords
Industrial–organizational psychology, post-apartheid, social justice, worker subjectivity,
workplace inequality

Rhodes University, South Africa

Corresponding author:
Sandiso Bazana, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa.
Email: [email protected]
568 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

Introduction
Does Industrial-Organizational Psychology, by virtue of its professional obligations, not also have a role
to play in making the world a better place for society at large? (van Vuuren, 2010, p. 1).

van Vuuren’s (2010) critical question underscores the urgent need for re-evaluating industrial–
organizational psychology (IOP), particularly in post-apartheid South Africa. Originating in the
Global North, IOP’s emphasis on quantitative methods, while scientifically rigorous, often prior-
itizes efficiency and profitability, potentially advancing capitalist interests at the expense of
addressing socio-political and economic factors that influence workplace behavior and equity (Bal
& Dóci, 2018; Colarelli et al., 2021; White, 2000). Critics argue that this focus may perpetuate
systemic inequalities related to race, gender, and class—issues that IOP should actively address
(Bal & Dóci, 2018; Bowman et al., 2019; Islam & Sanderson, 2022). This article extends these
critiques by exploring how IOP’s narrow focus on organizational efficiency often overlooks
broader socio-historical dynamics that shape worker experiences (Gerard, 2023; Islam & Zyphur,
2006; Maree, 2019). In line with the Psychological Society of South Africa’s (PsySSA) call for
more socially responsible psychology, this article argues for a reimagining of psychology that
engages with South Africa’s socio-political realities, aligning the discipline with the broader post-
democratic knowledge project (Bowman et al., 2024).
This article contributes to this ongoing dialogue by advocating for a reimagined IOP framework
that aligns with PsySSA’s mission to promote an inclusive and socially just psychology. PsySSA’s
establishment in 1994 marked a pivotal moment in South Africa’s democratic transition, with a
mission to dismantle the legacies of apartheid and advance non-racialism and social justice
(Bowman et al., 2024). While PsySSA has prioritized efforts to address systemic racial and gender
inequalities, the South African Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOPSA), a
founding member, has focused more on professional autonomy, leading to differing approaches to
reform within the field of IOP (Crafford, 2022). Nonetheless, both organizations play critical roles
in shaping the profession in South Africa, with PsySSA emphasizing inclusivity and socio-histori-
cal awareness, and SIOPSA attending to professional development within a complex labor market
(Bhamjee, 2023; Crafford, 2022). These dynamics underscore the pressing need to reimagine IOP
in ways that fully integrate socio-political realities, ensuring that professional progress and social
justice goals are pursued in tandem (Carr et al., 2024).
Central to this reimagined IOP, the article introduces the concept of worker subjectivity, which
examines how individuals perceive and navigate their identities, agency, and roles within broader
socio-historical and economic power structures (Ezzy, 1997; Spicer & Alvesson, 2024). Worker
subjectivity offers a valuable lens for exploring the relationship between individual agency and the
structural constraints imposed by labor processes (O’Doherty & Willmott, 2000). It emphasizes the
reflexive and embodied nature of human agency, shaped by the interactions between individuals
and the socio-political, cultural, and economic forces that define their work environments
(O’Doherty & Willmott, 2000). In South Africa, where the legacies of colonialism and apartheid
continue to influence worker identities and experiences, focusing on worker subjectivity provides
critical insights into the ongoing issues of class, gender, and historical trauma that shape workplace
behavior (Nkomo, 2011). This approach allows IOP to move beyond its traditional emphasis on
productivity and efficiency to engage with the complexities of post-apartheid workplace realities
(Pietersen, 2005; van Vuuren, 2010).
To integrate worker subjectivity into IOP practice, this article draws on critical psychology and
critical management studies (CMS) (Spicer & Alvesson, 2024; Teo, 2023). It suggests that an
understanding of how individuals perceive and navigate their identities within socio-historical and
Bazana 569

economic power structures can significantly enhance IOP’s theoretical and practical frameworks.
Such an approach promotes a more inclusive understanding of workplace dynamics, acknowledg-
ing the deep-seated historical trauma, racial inequities, and socio-political challenges that shape
worker experiences and organizational behavior in South Africa. Re-examining IOP’s role within
the broader context of South African psychology highlights the discipline’s potential to contribute
meaningfully to societal transformation. By centering on worker subjectivity, IOP can offer new
insights into workplace behavior, intervention design, and the promotion of social justice. This
approach has profound implications for developing more equitable and socially conscious organi-
zational practices that align with PsySSA’s mission of fostering social justice and equality in South
Africa (Spicer & Alvesson, 2024; Teo, 2023).
Furthermore, incorporating worker subjectivity into IOP allows the discipline to broaden its
traditional quantitative models by adopting a more inclusive and transformative approach. Such an
approach retains the empirical rigor of IOP while also addressing socio-historical contexts. As
Louw (2021) reminds us, scientific rigor need not be limited to quantitative methods; contextual-
ized approaches, as demonstrated in Sherwood’s (1960) research, can also produce valuable
insights. By expanding its framework, IOP can maintain its scientific integrity while engaging
deeply with the lived experiences of workers within a broader socio-political and economic con-
text, providing a more holistic understanding of workplace dynamics. Engaging with these socio-
political realities would enable IOP to play a pivotal role in fostering social justice, promoting
equality, and shaping organizational cultures that genuinely reflect the diverse identities and expe-
riences of South African workers. These adaptations would help ensure that IOP achieves its full
transformative potential, aligning the discipline more closely with PsySSA’s broader mission of
social justice.
In sum, by adopting a balanced approach that integrates worker subjectivity and socio-historical
awareness, IOP can contribute meaningfully to the creation of equitable and inclusive workplace
environments. This reimagined approach not only aligns with PsySSA’s transformative vision but
also highlights the discipline’s potential to serve as a powerful catalyst for change in South Africa’s
evolving workplace landscape. By broadening its theoretical and practical frameworks, IOP can
address the deep-seated issues of race, class, and gender that continue to shape the labor market,
ultimately fostering a more just and inclusive society.

Historical and contemporary critique of IOP

The historical development of IOP in South Africa is deeply intertwined with global trends in
industrialization, especially those originating in the industrialized North, such as the United States
and Europe. Early IOP was heavily influenced by foundational scholars like Wilhelm Wundt and
Hugo Munsterberg, whose 1913 text Psychology and Industrial Efficiency established the ground-
work for empirical and quantitative approaches to optimizing workplace behavior (Colarelli et al.,
2021; White, 2000). This focus on scientific management and the measurement of human capabili-
ties was readily exported to South Africa during its rapid industrialization (Schreuder & Coetzee,
2010). IOP’s role became firmly embedded in the economic and political framework of the apart-
heid state, where psychological methods were utilized to reinforce and legitimize racial hierarchies
in the workplace (Schreuder & Coetzee, 2010; Schreuder, 2001).
A key institutional player in this process was the National Institute for Personnel Research
(NIPR), established in 1946, which formalized IOP’s role in South Africa. Its early work revolved
around psychometric testing designed to assess and categorize workers based on perceived abili-
ties, with the aim of improving recruitment, labor management, and training (Bowman et al., 2019;
Schreuder, 2001). These tests, however, were not neutral scientific tools; they were deeply
570 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

embedded in the racial ideologies of the apartheid regime. The General Adaptability Battery (GAB)
and the Special Test Battery (STB) were used specifically to segregate Black workers into unskilled
labor categories, thereby perpetuating their exploitation under apartheid labor laws (Bowman
et al., 2019; Laher & Cockcroft, 2013). These psychometric tools were aligned with the broader
socio-economic objectives of the apartheid regime, designed to maintain White dominance in
skilled and managerial roles while ensuring that Black workers remained trapped in exploitative,
low-wage labor positions (Cooper, 2013; Schreuder, 2001).
Despite the IOP’s complicity in upholding apartheid-era labor policies, there were moments
when the discipline subtly challenged these racial hierarchies. The work of Simon Biesheuvel, a
director of NIPR in 1946, regarded as the father of industrial psychology in South Africa, presents
a complex picture. While the NIPR research contributed to the operational needs of businesses
that benefited from apartheid labor practices, some of its findings subtly contradicted apartheid
ideology. However, such works were often suppressed or ignored by the state as evidenced by the
embargo placed on Rae Sherwood’s PhD dissertation, The African Civil Servant—A Socio-
Psychological Study, which critically examined the detrimental effects of apartheid on African
civil servants. The embargo, which lasted until 2018, reflects the broader suppression of research
that contradicted the apartheid state’s racial policies (Louw, 2021). In short, the history of IOP in
South Africa is one of both complicity and resistance. Hence, Bowman et al. (2019) caution
against a linear reading of IOP’s history, suggesting that it was not a straightforward progression
of complicity but was marked by moments of discontinuity and resistance, influenced by both
local and global pressures.
This critical perspective emphasizes the importance of examining IOP’s history in relation to
the broader social and political landscape, as well as the role of institutions in shaping the disci-
pline. The end of apartheid in 1994 and the subsequent democratic transition marked a significant
turning point for IOP in South Africa. The formation of the PsySSA in 1994 symbolized a commit-
ment to transforming psychology into a more inclusive and socially just discipline (Bowman et al.,
2024). PsySSA’s vision of non-racialism, social justice, and human rights aligned with South
Africa’s broader democratic goals, seeking to dismantle the oppressive legacies of apartheid in the
field of psychology (Crafford, 2022). However, the SIOPSA, originally a division within PsySSA,
gradually distanced itself from PsySSA’s transformative agenda, disagreeing with the organiza-
tion’s constitution, a matter that ended in court (Bhamjee, 2023).
The evolving relationship between PsySSA and SIOPSA reflects the broader tensions within
IOP in post-apartheid South Africa. While PsySSA has worked to engage the discipline with issues
of race, class, and gender, SIOPSA has historically emphasized organizational efficiency and pro-
fessional standards. These different priorities, however, do not represent a simple divide but rather
highlight the multiple roles that IOP must play in navigating the legacies of inequality alongside
the demands for professional growth and development (cf. Bhamjee, 2023; Crafford, 2022). This
dynamic relationship underscores the need for continued collaboration and reflection within both
organizations to address the complex realities of the South African workforce.
Moreover, the focus on managerialism reflects IOP’s alignment with capitalist priorities, which
has been criticized for prioritizing organizational outcomes over worker well-being (Bal & Dóci,
2018; Islam & Sanderson, 2022). In South Africa, where apartheid’s legacies continue to influ-
ence workplace dynamics, such critiques hold particular significance. Consequently, IOP has
remained largely separated from broader psychology disciplines, confined to commerce and busi-
ness rather than the humanities and social sciences. This separation reinforces IOP’s historical
role in upholding apartheid-era labor practices by maintaining control over workers and suppress-
ing efforts at labor organization. Post-democracy, this divide has persisted, with few African
workers in senior human resource management positions, further entrenching racial disparities
within South African workplaces.
Bazana 571

Globally, IOP has faced widespread critiques for its narrow focus on measurable outcomes and
its alignment with corporate and managerial objectives (Gerard, 2023; Islam & Zyphur, 2006).
Scholars argue that traditional IOP frameworks, which emphasize individual performance and
quantifiable metrics, often overlook the socio-historical conditions that shape worker behavior and
organizational dynamics (Colarelli et al., 2021). In the post-apartheid South African context, these
critiques take on particular significance, as the discipline’s preoccupation with efficiency and
effectiveness frequently aligns with capitalist imperatives, privileging profitability over worker
well-being and social justice (Crafford, 2022). Such critiques underscore the importance of moving
beyond a purely managerial approach and resonate with broader calls within critical work psychol-
ogy (CWP) to reimagine IOP as a discipline that engages more deeply with the socio-political
realities of the workplace (see Islam & Sanderson, 2022; Bal, 2020).
In settings like South Africa, where historical trauma, racial hierarchies, and class disparities
continue to shape labor practices, a more nuanced understanding of the worker’s lived experience
is necessary (Islam & Sanderson, 2022). In this context, worker subjectivity provides a critical
framework for understanding how individuals navigate their identities and agency within socio-
historical forces. The next section explores how integrating worker subjectivity into IOP can
address inequality and promote social justice in the South African workplace.

Worker subjectivity: a theoretical framework

The concept of worker subjectivity represents a crucial rethinking of the traditional IOP frame-
work, offering a more inclusive and socially engaged perspective on workplace behavior. Worker
subjectivity refers to the ways in which workers perceive and navigate their identities, agency, and
roles within broader socio-historical, political, and economic structures (Spicer & Alvesson, 2024;
Teo, 2023). This concept challenges the positivist assumptions that have historically dominated
IOP, which tend to focus on quantifiable metrics of performance while neglecting the social,
cultural, and political forces that shape worker experiences (Teo, 2023). By drawing on critical
psychology and CMS, this article advocates for an approach to IOP that fully acknowledges the
complexities of South African workplaces, where historical trauma, racial inequities, and socio-
political dynamics profoundly influence organizational behavior.
Critical psychology, in particular, provides valuable insights into how power dynamics and
social contexts shape subjectivity, extending beyond individual “first-person” perspectives to
include intersubjectivity, intrapersonal experiences, and collective processes (Teo, 2023; Zahavi,
2007). This approach situates the individual self within broader historical, socio-political, and eco-
nomic contexts, recognizing that organizations function as microcosms of society (Hook, 2012).
By examining how workers experience and navigate their roles within these structures, critical
psychology highlights the ways in which subjectivity is co-constructed through interactions with
these larger systems of power and inequality (Hook, 2012; Islam & Zyphur, 2006; Teo, 2023).
Rather than treating workers as isolated individuals subject to managerial control, critical psychol-
ogy views workers as active agents whose subjectivities are shaped by broader socio-political
forces (Teo, 2023). This perspective is essential for understanding how workers in post-apartheid
South Africa navigate the racialized, gendered, and class hierarchies that continue to define work-
place environments.
Worker subjectivity is an embodied and reflexive process, shaped by both conscious and uncon-
scious engagement with work (cf. Zahavi, 2007). It involves the internalization of power dynam-
ics, managerial practices, and organizational structures, which in turn shape workers’ identities and
agency (O’Doherty & Willmott, 2000; Teo, 2023). In the South African context, where the legacies
of colonialism and apartheid continue to affect workers’ identities and workplace experiences,
572 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

worker subjectivity provides a valuable framework for understanding the deeper issues of race,
gender, and class that influence labor relations (Nkomo, 2011). By focusing on how workers inter-
nalize or resist these power structures, IOP can move beyond its traditional emphasis on productiv-
ity to address the complexities of the post-apartheid workplace.
Worker subjectivity also highlights the importance of emotional and psychological labor in the
workplace, particularly for workers from marginalized communities. The legacy of racialized labor
under apartheid has left deep psychological scars for Black workers, many of whom continue to
face exclusion and marginalization in the post-apartheid workplace (Booysen, 2007; Manganyi,
2019). For example, Black workers often navigate workplace cultures still dominated by White
management, which perpetuates historical power imbalances and undermines their sense of belong-
ing and agency (Booysen, 2007; Crafford, 2022). By integrating worker subjectivity into IOP prac-
tice, practitioners can gain a more nuanced understanding of how emotional and psychological
dimensions influence workplace behavior and organizational outcomes. This perspective aligns
with the objectives of CMS, which seek to explore and challenge the deeper power structures that
shape organizational practices and worker experiences (cf. Spicer & Alvesson, 2024).
Within CMS, worker subjectivity is a central concept for understanding how workers’ identities
are shaped by managerial practices, organizational discourses, and broader societal structures
(Knights & McCabe, 2000). This approach builds on Marxist critiques of capitalism, which high-
light how workers are commodified within capitalist labor systems, treated as objects for capital
accumulation rather than as subjects with inherent value (cf. Ezzy, 1997; Marx, 1867/1990).
Feminist theory also contributes to this framework, emphasizing how gendered and sexualized
labor practices further stratify workers and shape their experiences of power and marginalization
(Spicer & Alvesson, 2024). By integrating these perspectives, IOP can develop more socially con-
scious and equitable organizational practices, fostering environments that recognize the diverse
identities and experiences of all workers.
In short, the concept of worker subjectivity provides a critical lens for reimagining IOP in post-
apartheid South Africa. By focusing on how workers internalize and navigate power structures
within the workplace, IOP can offer new insights into how organizations can address workplace
inequalities and promote social justice. This approach is particularly relevant in South Africa,
where the enduring legacies of apartheid continue to shape workplace dynamics (e.g., Bezuidenhout,
2004; Booysen, 2007). By integrating worker subjectivity into IOP theory and practice, the disci-
pline can contribute to creating more equitable and inclusive workplace environments that reflect
the diverse identities and experiences of South African workers.

Worker subjectivity in post-apartheid South African workplaces

Worker subjectivity offers a vital perspective for understanding the deeply rooted racial, gender,
and socio-political inequalities that persist in post-apartheid South African workplaces. Since the
end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa has implemented significant legislative reforms, such as the
Labor Relations Act (1996), the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (1997), and the Employment
Equity Act (1998). These laws were designed to safeguard workers’ rights and rectify the severe
inequities perpetuated by apartheid, especially for marginalized groups (Barkhuizen et al., 2022).
However, these measures have faced challenges in implementation and consistency, leading to new
tensions in workplaces. For instance, the Employment Equity Act, which was subject to intense
parliamentary debate, faced opposition from trade unions, particularly regarding the use of psycho-
logical assessments, which had historically been used to dehumanize Black workers in sectors like
mining (PSYSSA, 1998a, 1998b). The act was later amended to include provisions ensuring psy-
chological testing is fair, valid, and reliable (PSYSSA, 1998a, 1998b).
Bazana 573

Despite these reforms, significant tensions remain, particularly regarding affirmative action
policies, which some see as necessary reparations while others criticize as “reverse racism” (Mayer
et al., 2019). The persistence of gender disparities and the underrepresentation of African workers
in senior management further highlight the enduring influence of apartheid-era exclusionary prac-
tices (Crafford, 2022). For instance, Black workers, particularly Black women, remain signifi-
cantly underrepresented in leadership roles, and labor market dynamics continue to be shaped by
apartheid’s economic legacy (Booysen, 2007; Crafford, 2022). Addressing these inequalities
requires an examination of both the structural and psychological dimensions of work, as Black
workers must navigate workplaces still shaped by historical trauma and systemic exclusion (cf.
Adonis, 2016; Long, 2021).
Understanding worker subjectivity is essential for unpacking the intersection of race, gender,
and socio-economic status that shape individual experiences within the workplace. These subjec-
tivities manifest in communication barriers, deep-seated mistrust, and historical trauma, all of
which influence organizational culture and employee relations (cf. Long, 2021; Manganyi, 2019).
The enduring effects of apartheid’s socio-historical context, particularly evident in events like the
2012 Marikana Massacre, illustrate the profound power differentials and structural injustices that
continue to shape the South African workplace (Neocosmos, 2016; Sithole, 2020). Such events
demonstrate the ongoing struggle for dignity and basic rights within “neo-apartheid” workplace
structures, reinforcing the importance of critically addressing both the psychological and material
conditions faced by workers (Neocosmos, 2016; Sithole, 2020).
In this context, worker subjectivity emphasizes how workers internalize, resist, and navigate the
power structures and historical legacies that shape their experiences in the workplace. In South
Africa, where the legacies of apartheid are still palpable, this includes the ongoing effects of racial
capitalism—a system in which racial hierarchies are used to reinforce economic inequality
(cf. Sithole, 2020). During apartheid, Black workers were relegated to low-wage, precarious jobs,
while White workers dominated managerial and decision-making positions (Goldman, 2016). This
division has left a lasting imprint on the economic and psychological experiences of Black workers
in post-apartheid South Africa. Even as formal policies have changed, the emotional labor required
of Black workers to navigate these racialized hierarchies remains significant (cf. Long, 2021;
Manganyi, 2019).
Worker subjectivity helps illuminate how these structural inequalities manifest in workers’
psychological experiences, including their sense of self-worth, agency, and belonging in the
workplace. In many cases, Black workers must reconcile their identities with organizational cul-
tures still dominated by White management, perpetuating historical power imbalances. This dis-
sonance often results in feelings of inferiority, exclusion, and frustration, which, in turn, affect
workplace performance and well-being (Booysen, 2007). In addition, Long (2021) highlights how
the ongoing racial tensions in South African workplaces lead to emotional dissonance, as Black
workers grapple with feelings of alienation in environments where they remain underrepresented
and triggered by the materiality of whiteness.
Traditional IOP models, which prioritize quantifiable performance metrics, are often insuffi-
cient for fully understanding these complexities. Worker subjectivity, by contrast, provides a more
nuanced framework for understanding how workers’ emotions, identities, and experiences are
shaped by broader socio-political and historical contexts (Teo, 2023). In South Africa, where race
and class continue to shape workplace relationships, the integration of worker subjectivity into IOP
practice can provide valuable insights into how organizations address the emotional dimensions
of inequality. The persistence of structural racism and economic inequalities means that White
workers continue to dominate senior roles, while Black workers are often confined to lower-level
574 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

positions, which are characterized by insecurity and limited opportunities for advancement
(Crafford, 2022).
Moreover, worker subjectivity highlights how power dynamics and historical legacies affect
interpersonal relationships within organizations. The enduring legacies of colonialism and apart-
heid have profoundly shaped workplace hierarchies and communication patterns, exerting a sig-
nificant influence on organizational culture, human behavior, and leadership values (Crafford,
2022; Manganyi, 2019). Workers must navigate these dynamics in their daily interactions, often
internalizing or resisting the power structures that define their roles and relationships within the
organization (Manganyi, 2019). These tensions permeate communication and decision-making
processes, reinforcing the psychological and emotional dimensions of power in the workplace.
Teo (2023) emphasizes that worker subjectivity involves both resistance and adaptation, as
workers engage with or resist the power structures that shape their labor environments. This resist-
ance can take many forms, ranging from subtle acts of defiance to more overt challenges to mana-
gerial authority. In post-apartheid South Africa, workers from marginalized backgrounds frequently
resist the historical exclusion they continue to experience in the workplace by advocating for
greater representation, equity, and inclusion (Neocosmos, 2016). However, resistance is not always
straightforward, as workers may also internalize the power structures that marginalize them, lead-
ing to ambivalence or complicity in perpetuating those structures (Teo, 2023). Understanding these
dynamics is essential for developing organizational practices that promote social cohesion, equity,
and justice within the workplace.
One of the key challenges in post-apartheid South Africa is the persistence of discriminatory
organizational and managerial practices that perpetuate marginalization and exploitation, particu-
larly among historically disadvantaged groups (Crafford, 2022; Nkomo, 2021). Discriminatory
hiring and promotion practices are common, with Black workers often receiving fewer opportuni-
ties for advancement (Ndzwayiba, 2017). Furthermore, unequal resource allocation and access to
educational and employment opportunities remain critical barriers for Black workers (Ndzwayiba,
2017; Nkomo, 2021). For instance, Rapiya et al. (2023) have recently highlighted the marginaliza-
tion of African spirituality practices within South African organizations, leading to considerable
distress among workers. The prevalence of precarious employment arrangements, such as casuali-
zation and contract labor, further exacerbates workers’ vulnerabilities and curtails their ability to
assert their rights or negotiate fair working conditions (Mabilo, 2018).
The lens of worker subjectivity may prove indispensable for addressing these complex dynam-
ics, as it provides a framework for understanding how structural inequalities manifest in psycho-
logical and emotional experiences in the workplace. In South Africa, where workers must contend
with the intertwined legacies of colonialism and apartheid, acknowledging these socio-historical
influences is critical for fostering inclusive and equitable organizational practices (Booysen, 2007).
Moreover, the application of worker subjectivity underscores the importance of addressing both
the structural and emotional dimensions of inequality, particularly for Black workers, who often
face compounded forms of discrimination based on race and gender. For example, Adonis (2016)
discusses how Black women in South Africa are marginalized in the workplace not only because
of their race but also because of their gender, which shapes their experiences of agency and
empowerment.
Beyond its theoretical value, the concept of worker subjectivity offers practical implications
for IOP practitioners. Traditional IOP methods, which rely heavily on quantitative assessments
like psychometric testing and standardized performance metrics, often overlook the subjective
experiences of workers. By contrast, qualitative methods such as narrative analysis, interviews,
and participatory research provide deeper insights into how workers perceive and navigate their
roles within the workplace. These methods allow workers to articulate their experiences in their
Bazana 575

own terms, revealing the complexities of their emotional and psychological engagement with
work (Adonis, 2016; Teo, 2023). Embracing worker subjectivity allows IOP to develop interven-
tions that are more attuned to the lived experiences of workers, particularly those from marginal-
ized backgrounds.
For example, O’Brien and Arnold’s (2024) study on mother creatives highlights how these
workers navigate the cognitive and emotional burdens of balancing conflicting identities as both
mothers and professionals. This research underscores the importance of understanding worker sub-
jectivity as a dynamic, multilayered process that involves constant negotiation between different
aspects of identity. Similarly, Black workers in South Africa often experience cognitive dissonance
as they reconcile workplace expectations with societal pressures and historical exclusion. These
subjective experiences cannot be captured by traditional performance metrics but require a deeper
understanding of the emotional and psychological dimensions of work (cf. Booysen, 2007; Spicer
& Alvesson, 2024).
However, the integration of worker subjectivity into IOP practice also comes with certain risks.
In some contexts, the focus on worker subjectivity can be co-opted by neoliberal frameworks,
which use workers’ emotional engagement as a tool for enhancing productivity and compliance
(Spicer & Alvesson, 2024). For example, in industries such as IT and the creative sectors, organiza-
tions may encourage workers to embrace their “authentic selves,” yet this authenticity is often
commodified and exploited to align with corporate goals (O’Brien & Arnold, 2024). This com-
modification of worker subjectivity is particularly concerning in South Africa, where racial and
economic hierarchies continue to dominate the workplace. Thus, there is a danger that worker
subjectivity could be reduced to a tool for enhancing productivity, rather than being used as a
framework for promoting social justice and equity.
Worse still, unions and other forms of collective organizing have been co-opted into the power
elite, leaving the worker base vulnerable. Many so-called empowerment entities in post-apartheid
South Africa have functioned as get-rich-quick schemes for the nomenklatura, offering little ben-
efit to the workers they purportedly represent. This exploitation of worker subjectivity mirrors the
ways in which unions have been increasingly subsumed into the corporate power structures they
were originally designed to contest (cf. Neocosmos, 2016). Thus, IOP practitioners must adopt a
critical approach to worker subjectivity, ensuring that interventions prioritize worker agency and
collective organizing over individual compliance and emotional management.
At the same time, there are positive examples of how worker subjectivity can be harnessed for
collective action. Movements like #FeesMustFall, #OutsourcingMustFall, and #TotalShutdown
reflect the potential for workers to mobilize against systemic oppression and injustice
(Rugunanan, 2016). These movements not only contest existing power structures but also pave
the way for alternative forms of engagement and solidarity among workers across diverse sec-
tors. Furthermore, initiatives aimed at promoting worker participation and representation, such
as cooperatives, offer important avenues for amplifying voices and advancing collective inter-
ests in the workplace.
In sum, the lens of worker subjectivity offers a vital framework for addressing the complex
intersections of historical legacies, power dynamics, and individual experiences in the workplace.
By centering the subjective perspectives and lived realities of workers, IOP practitioners can
develop more contextually relevant interventions that acknowledge the deep socio-historical influ-
ences shaping South African workplaces. This theoretical framework not only enhances the disci-
pline’s capacity to address inequality but also positions IOP as a catalyst for meaningful change in
post-apartheid South Africa. By adopting a critical and inclusive approach to worker subjectivity,
organizations can foster more equitable and empowering environments, contributing to the broader
goals of social justice and human dignity.
576 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

Future trajectories and recommendations

The future of IOP in South Africa requires a fundamental rethinking of its methodologies, prac-
tices, and priorities. To address the complex socio-historical realities of the South African work-
place, IOP must expand its traditional reliance on quantitative assessments and embrace
methodologies that center on the lived experiences of workers. This includes a greater emphasis on
qualitative research methods, such as participatory action research, longitudinal studies, and narra-
tive analysis, which can provide more in-depth insights into the subjective experiences of workers
(Colarelli et al., 2021; Maree, 2019). By adopting these methods, IOP can ensure that its interven-
tions are responsive to the emotional and psychological dimensions of workplace inequality, par-
ticularly in contexts shaped by historical trauma.
The education and training of IOP practitioners must be fundamentally reformed to better equip
future professionals with the tools and perspectives necessary to address the socio-political reali-
ties of the workplace. Currently, many IOP programs prioritize business management and produc-
tivity, often overlooking the broader social, emotional, and cultural dimensions of work (Crafford,
2022). Practitioners must critically engage with their own subjectivity, or Weltanschauung, recog-
nizing how their perspectives influence their approach to workplace dynamics. To bridge this gap,
IOP curricula should integrate critical frameworks from postcolonial theory, decolonial psychol-
ogy, and intersectionality, offering students a deeper understanding of the socio-historical forces
that continue to shape organizational behavior (Malherbe et al., 2021). In addition, practical train-
ing in qualitative methods, alongside an emphasis on emotional intelligence, cultural competence,
and empathy, is essential to better prepare practitioners to navigate the complexities of post-apart-
heid workplaces. By embedding these critical approaches into IOP education, future professionals
will be better equipped to engage with both the structural and human elements of workplace ine-
qualities, fostering more inclusive and socially responsible organizational practices.
The reformation of IOP education should also extend to the discipline’s ethical frameworks.
Practitioners must be trained not only in managerial techniques but also in the principles of social
justice and equity. The curriculum must move beyond a narrow focus on enhancing business per-
formance to one that emphasizes the psychological well-being of workers, particularly those from
historically marginalized communities. A more critical and socially engaged IOP would challenge
students to question the socio-political dynamics that shape labor relations, fostering a more reflex-
ive and ethically driven approach to their practice. The inclusion of modules on decolonial psy-
chology and critical management studies would equip practitioners with the theoretical and
practical tools necessary to address the complexities of the South African workplace (cf. Goldman,
2016; Rugunanan, 2016).
Moreover, there is a need for interdisciplinary collaboration within IOP, as the challenges of
the post-apartheid workplace are too complex to be addressed by psychology alone. Collaboration
with fields such as sociology, anthropology, history, and political science could provide deeper
insights into how race, class, and gender intersect in shaping workplace experiences. For instance,
integrating the insights of postcolonial theory with the psychological analysis of workplace
dynamics could offer a more comprehensive understanding of how historical legacies continue to
affect workers’ identities and organizational cultures (Teo, 2023). By embracing interdisciplinary
approaches, IOP can develop more innovative and holistic interventions that address the struc-
tural, psychological, and emotional dimensions of workplace inequality.
The development of leadership models that prioritize emotional intelligence, cultural compe-
tence, and reflexivity is also crucial for the future of IOP. In post-apartheid South Africa, where
racial, gender, and class tensions remain pervasive, leaders who are attuned to the emotional and
psychological needs of their workers will be better equipped to foster inclusive and equitable
Bazana 577

workplace environments. Traditional leadership models, which often emphasize efficiency and
control, are insufficient for addressing the complex socio-political realities of the South African
workplace. Instead, leaders must be trained to recognize and address the emotional and psycho-
logical impacts of historical trauma, racial exclusion, and gender discrimination on their workers.
This requires a shift in leadership paradigms, moving away from the traditional emphasis on organ-
izational outcomes and toward a more people-centered approach.
PsySSA, with its commitment to non-racialism, social justice, and human rights, provides an
excellent model for how IOP can align itself with broader societal goals. PsySSA’s mission to pro-
mote inclusive, socially just, and ethical psychology should guide IOP’s evolution as it seeks to
reconcile its historical role with its future potential. By aligning itself more closely with PsySSA’s
vision, IOP can ensure that it contributes meaningfully to the broader goals of social transforma-
tion in post-apartheid South Africa. This alignment would involve not only theoretical changes but
also practical engagement with workplace policies that promote equity, inclusion, justice, and sus-
tainability as envisaged in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) (Carr et al.,
2024). For example, IOP practitioners can advocate for policies that address racial and gender
disparities in hiring, promotions, and leadership positions, ensuring that workers from marginal-
ized backgrounds have access to the same opportunities as their White counterparts (Crafford,
2022).

Conclusion
Reimagining the framework of IOP in South Africa through the lens of worker subjectivity offers
a transformative approach to addressing the persistent racial, gender, and socio-political inequali-
ties that continue to shape post-apartheid workplaces. Traditional IOP, with its focus on quantifia-
ble metrics and organizational efficiency, has often failed to account for the complex socio-historical
realities that define worker experiences, particularly for Black and marginalized workers. By inte-
grating worker subjectivity into IOP practice, the discipline can offer a more holistic, inclusive
framework that acknowledges the emotional, psychological, and historical dimensions of work
(Booysen, 2007; Teo, 2023).
This article has demonstrated that worker subjectivity provides valuable insights into how
workers navigate their identities, agency, and roles within the broader socio-political structures that
shape the South African workplace. By focusing on how workers internalize or resist the power
dynamics of their work environments, IOP practitioners can develop interventions that promote
social justice, equity, and well-being in the workplace. This shift is essential for addressing the
deep-seated inequalities that persist in post-apartheid South Africa’s labor market, where race,
gender, and class continue to define workers’ opportunities and experiences.
Aligning IOP with the broader mission of the PsySSA is crucial for promoting a socially just
and inclusive psychology. PsySSA’s commitment to non-racialism, social justice, and human rights
offers a guiding framework for how IOP can evolve to meet the challenges of post-apartheid South
Africa (Bowman et al., 2024). By embracing PsySSA’s transformative vision, IOP can move
beyond its traditional focus on business efficiency to become a powerful catalyst for social change,
contributing to the creation of more equitable and inclusive workplaces that reflect the diverse
identities and experiences of all South African workers.
In sum, the future of IOP in South Africa requires a fundamental rethinking of its methodolo-
gies, education, and practices. By adopting a more socially engaged, interdisciplinary approach
that centers worker subjectivity, IOP can contribute meaningfully to the ongoing struggle for social
justice and workplace equality in post-apartheid South Africa. This transformation invites IOP
scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to engage in a critical, reflexive dialogue about the future
578 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

of the discipline, ensuring that it remains relevant and responsive to the complex realities of the
South African workplace.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publi-
cation of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD
Sandiso Bazana https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5177-2567

References
Adonis, C. K. (2016). Exploring the salience of intergenerational trauma among children and grandchil-
dren of victims of apartheid-era gross human rights violations. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology,
16(1–2), 163–179.
Bal, P. M. (2020). Why we should stop measuring performance and well-being. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und
Organisationspsychologie, 64(3), 196–200.
Bal, P. M., & Dóci, E. (2018). Neoliberal ideology in work and organizational psychology. European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(5), 536–548.
Barkhuizen, E. N., Masakane, G., & van der Sluis, L. (2022). In search of factors that hinder women’s career
advancement to senior leadership positions. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 48(1), 1–15.
Bhamjee, F. (2023). The complex transformation of the psychological society of South Africa (PsySSA)
[Doctoral thesis, University of South Africa]. Unisa Institutional Repository. https://uir.unisa.ac.za/han-
dle/10500/30683
Bezuidenhout, A. (2004). Post-colonial workplace regimes in the engineering industry in South Africa,
Swaziland and Zimbabwe. https://www.lse.ac.uk/international-development/Assets/Documents/PDFs/
csrc-working-papers-phase-one/wp53-post-colonial-workplace-regimes-in-engineeering.pdf
Booysen, L. (2007). Societal power shifts and changing social identities in South Africa: Workplace implica-
tions. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 10(1), 1–20.
Bowman, B., Malherbe, M., & Suffla, S. (2024). Three decades of psychology in South Africa: Legacies of
hope and fault lines of the future. South African Journal of Psychology, 54(4), 423–436.
Bowman, B., Siemers, I., & Whitehead, K. A. (2019). Genealogy in practice: Labour, discipline and power
in the production of the mineworker in South Africa. In S. Laher, A. Fynn, & S. Kramer (Eds.),
Transforming research methods in the social sciences: Case studies from South Africa (pp. 280–300).
Wits University Press. https://doi.org/10.18772/22019032750.23
Carr, S., Hodgetts, D. J., Hopner, V., & Young, M. (2024). From precarious work to sustainable livelihoods:
Introduction to the volume. In Tackling precarious work (pp. 1–26). Taylor & Francis.
Colarelli, S. M., Yang, C., & Mirando, T. J. (2020). Evolutionary industrial and organizational psychology.
In T. K. Shackelford (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of evolutionary psychology: Integration of evolutionary
psychology with other disciplines (pp. 114–151). Sage.
Cooper, S. (2013). Africanizing South African psychology. Journal of Black Psychology, 39(3), 212–222.
Crafford, A. (2022). Whiteness and stigma in the workplace: Organisation and work in South Africa. Springer
Nature.
Ezzy, D. (1997). Subjectivity and the labour process: Conceptualising good work. Sociology, 31(3), 427–444.
Gerard, N. (2023). Still servants of work? Exploring the role of the critic in work and organizational psychol-
ogy. Applied Psychology, 72(1), 13–25.
Goldman, G. A. (2016). On the possibility of fostering critical management studies in South Africa. Acta
Commercii, 16(2), 3–30.
Bazana 579

Hook, D. (2012). A critical psychology of the postcolonial: The mind of apartheid. Routledge.
Islam, G., & Sanderson, Z. (2022). Critical positions: Situating critical perspectives in work and organiza-
tional psychology. Organizational Psychology Review, 12(1), 3–34.
Islam, G., & Zyphur, M. (2006). Critical industrial psychology: What is it and where is it? SSRN.
Knights, D., & McCabe, D. (2000). “Ain’t misbehavin”? Opportunities for resistance under new forms of
“quality” management. Sociology, 34(3), 421–436. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42856195
Laher, S., & Cockcroft, K. (2013). Contextualising psychological assessment in South Africa. Psychological
Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications, 1–16.
Long, W. (2021). Nation on the couch: Inside South Africa’s mind. Melinda Ferguson Books.
Louw, J. (2021). A thesis embargoed: Personnel research and ideology in South Africa after World War II.
South African Journal of Science, 117(9–10), 1–6.
Mabilo, M. (2018). Women in the informal economy: Precarious labour in South Africa [Doctoral dissertation,
Stellenbosch University].
Malherbe, N., Ratele, K., Adams, G., Reddy, G., & Suffla, S. (2021). A decolonial Africa (n)-centred psy-
chology of antiracism. Review of General Psychology, 25(4), 437–450.
Manganyi, N. C. (2019). Being black in the world. Wits University Press.
Maree, D. J. (2019). Burning the straw man: What exactly is psychological science? SA Journal of Industrial
Psychology, 45(1), 1–5.
Marx, K. (1990). Capital: Volume 1: A critique of political economy (B. Fowkes, Trans.). Penguin Classics.
(Original work published 1867)
Mayer, C. H., Oosthuizen, R. M., & Tonelli, L. (2019). Subjective experiences of employment equity in South
African organisations. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(1), 1–12.
Ndzwayiba, N. A. (2017). Doing human differently: A critical study of appraised diversity discourses in
corporate South Africa [Doctoral dissertation, Witwatersrand University] http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/
handle/10539/24823.
Neocosmos, M. (2016). Editorial introduction: The Marikana moment, worker political subjectivity and state
violence in post-apartheid South Africa. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 51(2), 135–142.
Nkomo, S. M. (2011). A postcolonial and anti-colonial reading of ‘African ’ leadership and management in
organization studies: Tensions, contradictions and possibilities. Organization, 18(3), 365–386.
Nkomo, S. M. (2021). Reflections on the continuing denial of the centrality of “race” in management and
organization studies. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 40(2), 212–224.
O’Brien, A., & Arnold, S. (2024). Combining motherhood and work in the creative industries: Mothers have
the problem. Media, Culture & Society, 46, 1200–1215.
O’doherty, D., & Willmott, H. (2000). The question of subjectivity and the labour process. International
Studies of Management & Organization, 30(4), 112–132.
Pietersen, H. J. (2005). Knowledge development in industrial/organisational psychology (South Africa). SA
Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(2), 78–85.
Psychological Society of South Africa (PSYSSA). (1998a). Code of practice for psychological assessment
for the workplace in South Africa. Society for Industrial Psychology.
Psychological Society of South Africa (PSYSSA). (1998b). Guidelines for the validation and use of
assessment procedures for the workplace. Society for Industrial Psychology.
Rapiya, A., April, K., & Daya, P. (2023). Leader identity dissonance: Spirituality challenges of black African
professionals in the workplace. Effective Executive, 26(1), 45–89.
Rugunanan, S. D. (2016). Decolonising management studies: A love story. Acta Commercii, 16(2), 103–138.
Schreuder, D. M. (2001). The development of industrial psychology at South African universities: A histori-
cal overview and future perspective. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 27(4), 2–7.
Schreuder, D. M., & Coetzee, M. (2010). An overview of industrial and organisational psychology research in
South Africa: A preliminary study. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1–11.
Sherwood, R. (1960). The African civil servant—A socio-psychological study [Doctoral dissertation, University
of South Africa].
Sithole, T. (2020). The black register. John Wiley.
580 South African Journal of Psychology 54(4)

Spicer, A., & Alvesson, M. (2024, February 25). Critical management studies: A critical review. Journal of
Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13047
Teo, T. (2023). Subjectivity and work: Critical–theoretical reflections. Journal Psychologie des Alltag­
shandelns, 16(1), 39–44. http://www.allgemeine-psychologie.info/wp/journal-volume-16-number-1/
van Vuuren, L. J. (2010). Industrial psychology: Goodness of fit? Fit for goodness? SA Journal of Industrial
Psychology, 36(2), 1–16.
White, G. M. (2000). Histories and subjectivities. Ethos, 28(4), 493–510.
Zahavi, D. (2007). Subjectivity and the first‐person perspective. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 45(S1),
66–84.