Investigating the Concept of Organizational Dehumanization in the Public Sector with a Phenomenological Approach

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 epartment of Management, Sa.C, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran.

2 Department of Management, Sa.C, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran,

3 Department of Management, Sa.C, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran.

10.22111/jmr.2026.52388.6401

Abstract

Abstract
This study was conducted with the aim of gaining a deep understanding of the phenomenon of organizational dehumanization in government organizations. The research strategy was interpretive phenomenology based on the approach of Van Manen (2016) and the participants were employees of government organizations focused on social and cultural affairs located in Tehran. Purposive sampling - available judgment was carried out until theoretical saturation stage with 14 people. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using the content analysis technique. The validity and reliability of the data were confirmed using the four criteria of validity, stability, confirmability, and transferability of Guba and Lincoln (1989). Data analysis and coding led to the identification of concepts in two dimensions: the underlying factors of dehumanization in government organizations (177 primary themes, 31 sub-themes, 12 main themes) and the consequences of dehumanization (128 primary themes, 28 sub-themes, 13 main themes). Dehumanization in government organizations means reducing or eliminating human aspects from administrative processes, decision-making, and organizational interactions. This phenomenon can be formed for various reasons, including excessive bureaucracy, strict laws, new technologies, and inhuman organizational culture. It seems that in these circumstances, by reforming administrative structures, promoting a human culture, and creating interactive systems, an effective step can be taken to reduce this phenomenon in government organizations.
Case study
case study: Government organizations focused on social and cultural affairs located in Tehran
Introduction
The present era is called the era of digital technologies. One of the prominent and growing features of the present era is the phenomenon of dehumanization in organizations. In examining the dark side of the employee-employer relationship, researchers have recently turned their attention to the concept of organizational dehumanization, which is defined as "the experience of an employee who feels objectified by his or her organization." The term dehumanization originates from the social psychology literature and refers to the denial of human characteristics, and researchers have recently realized that dehumanization may also occur in organizational contexts, such that employees feel that the organization treats them as tools to pursue organizational goals. On the other hand, evidence has shown that the phenomenon of dehumanization is progressing significantly in both public and private organizations.
Materials and Methods
This qualitative study was conducted to investigate the organizational dehumanization of government employees using a hermeneutic phenomenological method based on the van Manen (2016) approach. The research population consisted of government employees focused on social and cultural affairs located in Tehran. The method of selecting the sample was purposive - judgmental, with the input criteria being the full willingness of the organization and individuals to cooperate, having more than 15 years of experience, and the occurrence of symptoms of burnout, isolation, job abandonment, and absenteeism. The participants were selected by visiting the human resources departments of government organizations and subordinate departments in person, and were asked to introduce employees who have high rates of absenteeism and job abandonment and also symptoms such as isolation, indifference and job abandonment that had not been observed before, so that individuals could participate in the study if they were willing. Semi-structured interviews, which are the most common form of interview in qualitative research, were used to collect information. Thus, after conducting 12 interviews, the information obtained was repeated and to ensure saturation, the interviews continued up to 14 people. Van Manen's (2016) six-step method was used to analyze the data, which includes the first step of approaching the nature of the lived experience, the second step of exploring the experience under study as it was lived, the third step of reflecting on the intrinsic themes that characterize the phenomenon, the fourth step of the art of writing and rewriting, the fifth step of maintaining a strong and directional connection with the phenomenon, and the sixth step of matching the research by considering the relationship between the parts and the whole. Lincoln and Guba's assessment was used to evaluate the research, which is based on the four axes of validity, verifiability, repeatability, and verifiability. Ethical considerations in this study were implemented through measures such as obtaining informed consent from participants, keeping all interviews confidential, keeping participants' names hidden, maintaining confidentiality in transferring interview texts from oral to written text, and determining the time and place of interviews with the participants' agreement.
Discussion and Results
After analyzing the data obtained from the interviews regarding the factors affecting the occurrence of dehumanization in the organization, 177 primary themes were identified regarding the factors affecting the occurrence of dehumanization in the organization. After reviewing the primary themes and categorizing them several times, 31 sub-themes were finally summarized into 12 main themes (inefficient management, cold and inhuman organizational culture, bureaucratic and strict structure, unhealthy organizational atmosphere, disregard for the mental health and well-being of employees, poor communication, inefficient job structure, employee exploitation, elimination of creativity and innovation, dominance of technology and advanced technologies, pressures from the organizational environment, stress and anxiety). Also, after analyzing the data obtained from interviews regarding the consequences of dehumanization in government organizations, 128 primary themes were identified regarding the consequences of dehumanization in government organizations. After reviewing the primary themes and categorizing them several times, 28 sub-themes were finally categorized into 13 main themes (leaving service, burnout, organizational silence, decreased commitment, decreased job satisfaction, decreased social responsibility, increased conflicts, decreased ideation, distrust, increased administrative corruption, decreased long-term productivity, severe job stress, damage to the organization's brand).
Conclusion
In government organizations, the phenomenon of organizational dehumanization can manifest itself in the form of ignoring the human needs of employees and clients, turning people into numbers and files, and creating inhuman bureaucratic systems. Undoubtedly, dehumanization in government organizations is a serious problem that can lead to reduced efficiency, increased corruption, and public dissatisfaction. According to the research findings, it is suggested that by reforming administrative structures, promoting a humane culture and creating interactive systems, strengthening a culture of respect and valuing individuals, appreciating employees' efforts through positive feedback and appropriate rewards, ensuring the well-being and human needs of employees, involving employees in organizational decision-making, preventing soulless bureaucracy and mechanical behaviors, providing opportunities for learning and personal growth for employees, and creating a balance between work and personal life through the adoption of flexible policies, government organizations can be transformed into more efficient, humane, and responsive environments.

Keywords


منابع فارسی
ابراهیمی، مرضیه؛ شرافت، شمیم؛ ودادهیر، ابوعلی و عینی زیناب، حسن. (1400). انسان‌زدایی در مناسبات پزشک و بیمار: بررسی تجربی و انطباق نظری. مجله جامعه شناسی ایران، 22(4)، 33 – 53.
اشراقی، محمد؛ احمدی، غلامعلی و افراسیابی، رویا. (1400). ارائه الگوی پیشنهادی در جهت کاهش سکوت سازمانی (مطالعه موردی: اداره کل فرهنگ و ارشاد خراسان شمالی)، مطالعات رفتاری در مدیریت، 12(28)، 33 – 47.
بختیاری دستگردی، زهرا. (1401). بررسی تأثیر انسانیت­زدایی بر بی نزاکتی درک شده، پنهان­سازی دانش و دزدی زمان کارکنان:نقش متغیرهای تعدیل­گر سرمایه روانشناختی و معنویت در محل کار، پایان­نامه کارشناسی ارشد، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
تقی پناهی، علیرضا؛ مرتضائی، رضا و ساوند، زینب. (1401). در جستجوی انسانیت؛ مروری بر نظریه‌های انسانیت کاهی و انسانیت زدایی. رویش روان شناسی، 11(6)، 79 – 90.
توکلی، مرضیه. (1402). مقایسه استرس ناشی از تکنولوژی در شاغلین آنالین با حضوری، فصلنامه ایده­های نوین در روانشناسی، 22(18)، 1 – 11.
حبیبی، آرش و جلال­نیا راحله. (1401). پدیدارشناسی، تهران، انتشارات نارون دانش
خدابخشی، محمد؛ صمدزاده، مریم و مبارکی، حسین (1398). بررسی تاثیر ساختار سازمانی بر تحلیل رفتگی شغلی کارکنان حوزه ستادی وزارت بهداشت،درمان و آموزش پزشکی. طب و تزکیه، 28(ویژه نامه علوم انسانی)، 48 – 57.
زرندی، سعید؛ حمیدی حصاری،یاسین و معدنی، جواد. (1396). عوامل مؤثر بر فساد اداری در سازمان‌های دولتی جمهوری اسلامی ایران. مجلس و راهبرد، 24(91)، 165 – 202.
شهبازی، هما؛ صادقی، منصوره السادات و پناغی، لیلی. (1396). نقش انسانیت زدایی در بروز همسرآزاری از دیدگاه زنان قربانی خشونت خانگی: یک مطالعه کیفی. سلامت اجتماعی، 4(3)، 179 – 189.
عقیلی، سیده فروغ؛ نعامی، عبدالزهرا و هاشمی، سید اسماعیل. (1403). تدوین و آزمون الگویی از اثر انسانیت‌زدایی‌سازمانی بر برخی پیامدهای سازمانی با میانجی‌گری عدم‌تأمین نیاز‌های روانشناختی بنیادین سازمان. پژوهش­های روانشناسی اجتماعی، 14(54)، 85 – 98.
فتاحی سرند، وحید؛ فتح­علینژاد، ابوالفضل و سعادتی، ادریس. (1402). بررسی تاثیر انسانیت­زدایی سازمانی بر رفتارهای انحرافی کارکنان با نقش واسط استرس شغلی (مطالعه موردی: دانشگاه علوم پزشکی و خدمات بهداشتی درمانی کردستان)، هفتمین کنفرانس ملی افق­های نوین در علوم انسانی، اقتصاد، کارآفرینی. اسفند 1402 تهران.
محمدی بشیر، رضا؛ فرمانی، ساسان و رضا قلی­نژاد، بهنام. (1402). نقش واسطه­ای انسانیت­زدایی سازمانی در تاثیر تشریفات زائد بر نتایج رفتاری کارکنان، چهارمین کنفرانس بین­المللی مطالعات نوین در علوم انسانی، علوم تربیتی، حقوق و مطالعات اجتماعی.
 
References
Aghili, S. F. , Naami, A. Z. & Hashemi, S. E. (2024). Developing and Testing a Model of Organizational Dehumanization’s Effect on Some of Organizational Consequences with Mediation of Lack of Organizational Fundamental Psychological Needs Thwarting. Social Psychology Research, 14(54), 85-98. (In Persian)
Andrighetto, L., Baldissarri, C., Lattanzio, S., Loughnan, S., & Volpato, C. (2014). Human‐itarian aid? Two forms of dehumanization and willingness to help after natural disasters. British journal of social psychology, 53(3), 573-584.
Ariño-Mateo, E., Ramírez-Vielma, R., Arriagada-Venegas, M., Nazar-Carter, G., & Pérez-Jorge, D. (2022). Validation of the Organizational Dehumanization Scale in Spanish-Speaking Contexts. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(8),1-14.
Arriagada-Venegas, M., Ramírez-Vielma, R., & Ariño-Mateo, E. (2021). The moderating role of organizational dehumanization in the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors. UCJC Business and Society Review, (69), 90-127.
Bakhtiari Dastgerdi, Z (2012). Investigating the effect of dehumanization on perceived incivility, knowledge concealment, and employee time theft: The role of moderating variables of psychological capital and spirituality in the workplace, Master's thesis, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian)
Bell, C. M., & Khoury, C. (2011). Organizational de/humanization, deindividuation, anomie, and in/justice. In Emerging Perspectives on Organizational Justice and Ethics; Gilliland, S., Steiner, D., Skarlicki, D., Eds.; IAP Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC, USA, 167–197.
Bell, C. M., & Khoury, C. (2016). Organizational powerlessness, dehumanization, and gendered effects of procedural justice. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(2), 570–585.
Brison, N., Stinglhamber, F., & Caesens, G. (2022). Organizational dehumanization. In Oxford research encyclopedia of psychology, 1-42.
Caesens, G., & Stinglhamber, F. (2019). The relationship between organizational dehumanization and outcomes: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61(9), 699-703.
Caesens, G., Stinglhamber, F., Demoulin, S., & De Wilde, M. (2017). Perceived organizational support and employees’ well-being: The mediating role of organizational dehumanization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(4), 527–540.
Christoff, K. (2014). Dehumanization in organizational settings: Some scientific and ethical considerations. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8(748), 1-5.
Demoulin, S., Brison, N., & Stinglhamber, F. (2023). Perceived sexualization of the work environment's influence on well‐being, attitudes, and behaviors: The roles of organizational dehumanization and enjoyment of sexualization. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 53(10), 1012-1026.
Ebrahimi, M. , sherafat, S. , Vedadhir, A. & Eini-zeinab, H. (2021). Dehumanization in physician-patient relationships: An empirical study and theoretical grounding. Iranian Journal of Sociology, 22(4), 33-53. (In Persian)
Eshraghi, M. , Ahmadi, Gh. & Afrasiabi, R. (2017). Presenting a proposed model to reduce organizational silence, Behavioral Studies in Management, 12(28), 33-47. (In Persian)
Fattahi Sarand, V. ,Fatha Alinejad, A.  & Saadati, I. (2024). Investigating the effect of organizational dehumanization on employees' deviant behaviors with the mediating role of job stress (Case study: Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services), 7th National Conference on New Horizons in Humanities, Economics, Entrepreneurship. February 2024, Tehran. (In Persian)
Gip, H., Guchait, P., Paşamehmetoğlu, A., & Khoa, D. T. (2023). How organizational dehumanization impacts hospitality employees service recovery performance and sabotage behaviors: the role of psychological well-being and tenure. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(1), 64-91.
Habibi, A & Jalalnia, R. (1401). Phenomenology, Tehran, Narvan Danesh Publications. (In Persian)
Hamel, J. F., Scrima, F., Massot, L., & Montalan, B. (2023). Organizational culture, justice, dehumanization and affective commitment in French employees: A serial mediation model. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 19(3), 285- 304.
Hasan, M. M., Shafin, F., & Akter, N. (2023). The Role of Employee Stress in Workplace Bullying And its Effect on Organizational Performance-A Study on Bangladeshi Workplace. Cultural Communication and Socialization Journal, 4(1), 18-32.
Haslam, N. (2016). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and social psychology review, 10(3), 252-264.
Khodabakhshi, M. , Samadzadeh, M & Mobaraki, H. (2019). Survey the effect of organizational structure on burnout among employees of Medical & Health Ministry, Journal of Medicine Spiritual Cultivation, 28(3), 48-57. (In Persian)
Lagios, C., Stinglhamber, F., Restubog, S. L. D., Lagios, N., Brison, N., & Caesens, G. (2024). When organizational dehumanization hits home: Short‐scale validation and test of a spillover–crossover model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 97(3), 1037-1075.
Lagios, C., Caesens, G., Nguyen, N., & Stinglhamber, F. (2022). Explaining the negative consequences of organizational dehumanization: The mediating role of psychological need thwarting. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 21(2), 86–93.
Lagios, C., Nguyen, N., Stinglhamber, F., & Caesens, G. (2023). Dysfunctional rules in organizations: The mediating role of organizational dehumanization in the relationship between red tape and employees’ outcomes. European Management Journal, 41(5), 802-813.
Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2012). Power increases social distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(3), 282-290.
Leyens, J. -P., Paladino, M., Rodriguez -Torres, R., Vaes, J., Demoulin, S., Rodríguez, A., & Gaunt, R. (2000). The Emotional Side of Prejudice: The Attribution of Secondary Emotions to In-groups and Out-groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186 -197.
Maynard, J. L., & Luft, A. (2023). Humanizing dehumanization research. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 4, 1001 – 1023.
Mohammadi Bashir, Reza; Farmani, Sasan and Reza Gholinejad, Behnam (2024). The mediating role of organizational dehumanization in the impact of unnecessary formalities on employees' behavioral outcomes. Fourth International Conference on Modern Studies in Humanities, Educational Sciences, Law and Social Studies. My 2023, Tehran. (In Persian)
Nguyen, N., & Stinglhamber, F. (2020). Workplace mistreatment and emotional labor: A latent profile Analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 44(3), 474–490.
Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2012). Of animals and objects: Men’s implicit dehumanization of women and likelihood of sexual aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(6), 734-746.
Soraya, E., & Bekti, R. (2021). The influence of employee demotivation and employee motivation on employee performance: A case study of Farven. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 6(9), 561-568.
Stinglhamber, F., Caesens, G., Chalmagne, B., Demoulin, S., & Maurage, P. (2021). Leader–member exchange and organizational dehumanization: The role of supervisor’s organizational embodiment. European Management Journal, 39(6), 745-754.
Shahbazi, H. , Sadeghi, M & Panaghi, L. (2017). The Role of Dehumanization in the Incidence of Spouse Abuse from the Perspective of Female Victims of Domestic Violence: A Qualitative Study, Community Health, 4(3), 179 – 189. (In Persian)
Shin, H. H., Choi, S., & Kim, H. (2025). Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Human Resource Management (HRM): A driver of organizational dehumanization and negative employee reactions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 131, 104230.
Taghipanahi, A. , Mortezaie, R, & Savand, Z. (2022). In search of humanity; A review of theories of infra-humanization and de-humanization. Rooyesh. 11(6), 79-90. (In Persian)
Tavakoli, M. (2023) Comparison of Stress Caused by Technology in Online and Face-to-Face Workers. Quarterly Journal of New Ideas in Psychology; 18 (22), 1 – 10. (In Persian)
Van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Routledge.
Vayrynen, T., & Laari-Salmela, S. (2018). Men, mammals, or machines? Dehumanization embedded in organizational practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(1), 1-19.
Zarandi, S. , Hamidi, Y. & madani, J. (2017). Meta-analysis of Factors Affecting the Corruption Agencies in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Majlis and Rahbord, 24(91), 165-202. (In Persian)