![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
For decades, the German sociology of work had been dominated by a Marxism-inspired paradigm of interest. More recently, however, a paradigm of identity and recognition has gained prominence. This change is closely linked to a shift in the socio-theoretical, socio-political, and normative discourse as well as to a shift in labor relations, where identity, subjectivity, and recognition claims have become more important. The paradigm of recognition meets the requirements of these changes better than the old concept of interest. At the same time, however, the use of the concept of interest has become increasingly vague and has lost much of its explanatory power. Against this backdrop, the article argues for a multidimensional reconceptualization of ‘interest’ and ‘recognition’, which is necessary in order to save the concept of recognition from becoming a catch-all category. Based on the recognition theory of Axel Honneth and the contributions of Heinrich Popitz and Pierre Bourdieu, ‘interest’ is being conceptualized as a reflective form of a preference that makes actions calculable. The category of ‘interest identity’ will have a mediating role, conceived as the structure of those interests actors identify with as essential for their identity. The article argues for a concept of ‘recognition’ and ‘interest’ as complementary categories. Actors pursue an interest, and in doing so they seek recognition. But there can be a discrepancy of these action logics, too, which can lead to trade-offs between ‘recognition’ and ‘interest’. Moreover, ‘recognition’ and ‘interest’ can provide two distinct scripts for the articulation of concerns, disappointments, and conflicts among actors.
Notes
1. I thank the anonymous reviewers for their critical and constructive comments and advice.
2. For the historical concept of interest, see Neuendorff (Citation1973); for the tradition of interest in the economic sociology, see Swedberg (Citation2003).
3. These examples are based on interviews conducted in the context of a research project on ‘claims of “regular employees” to work and occupation development’, which is currently being realized by Stefanie Hürtgen and the author at the Institute of Social Research Frankfurt am Main.
4. I have to thank an anonymous reviewer of this article for his advice that Alessandro Pizzorno made an important contribution to the sociology of recognition not only in this instructive article but systematically in his work which I cannot appreciate here (cf. Di Mascio Citation2009; critical Aguiar and de Francisco 2002).
5. This study was conducted by the sociological department of the University of Goettingen between 1987 and 1989. It was based on 10 very extensive (with heads of personnel department, members of the works council, and a total of 83 fixed-term employees) and 31 briefer organization case studies.
6. This non-transparency proved not to be an isolated case but almost to be typical. The reason is that employers are anxious about an early dismissal or demotivation of the fixed-term employees, when they are told that their contracts would not be renewed or when the criteria for a renewal was communicated at an early stage.
7. See note number 3.
8. In addition, a change of the aspects which the waste collectors expected to be recognized for seemed to be impossible. They were caught up in their accustomed pattern of dealing with stigmata.
9. These thoughts came up for the first time in a discussion with Andreas Boes, Anja Bultemeier, Werner Schmidt, Sabine Zimmer, and Gabriele Wagner, to whom I therefore feel very obliged.
10. It was a sub-project of the project group on ‘structural change of recognition in the 21st century’, realized at the Institute of Social Research Frankfurt am Main and the University of Bielefeld between 2007 and 2010. The empirical sub-project was based on interviews with staff managers and works council members at 16 organizations of varying types and sizes in which we asked about the perception of recognition needs and recognition problems and about the recognition policies of the organizations. The results will be published in the near future (Voswinkel and Wagner forthcoming).