Available via license: CC BY-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH
2023, Vol. 4, No. 2, 236 – 244
http://dx.doi.org/10.11594/ijssr.04.02.12
How to cite:
Kusmayadi, Y., Ronda, A. M., & Seran, A. (2023). Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health: A
Critique of Corporate Culture, 4(1), 236 – 244. doi: 10.11594/ijssr.04.02.12
Research Article
UNDERSTANDING THE RECOGNITION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND
HEALTH: A CRITIQUE OF CORPORATE CULTURE
Yadi Kusmayadi1*, Andi Mirza Ronda1, Alexander Seran2
1Universitas Sahid Jakarta
2Prodi Magister Ekonomi Terapan, Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Katolik Indonesia
Atma Jaya, Jakarta
Article history:
Submission 25 November 2023
Revised 06 December 2023
Accepted 08 December 2023
ABSTRACT
In the era of globalization, in the face of industrial competition,
companies are attempting to instill a culture of Occupational Safety
and Health (OSH) as a symbol and image of their existence. However,
it is unfortunate that the presence of OSH in the company does not
always serve as a barometer of the company's normative compliance
with OSH. In practice, the rules governing worker behavior still show
varying degrees of permissiveness.
The practice of OSH must be accompanied by moral values in or-
der to achieve the desired condition. Therefore, there are two behav-
ioral approaches in OSH communication practices in companies: (1)
do the things right, which means following the rules. This does not
necessarily resolve OSH problems, as ‘rules’ at the minimum only reg-
ulate employee behavior and (2) do the right things, which is moral in
nature, which allows workers to act and behave according to their na-
ture because what is outlined in the rules does not always reflect free
will, so in the end each worker must find a way to do what’s best.
The critical-interpretive approach with phenomenological
method in research focuses on the meaning and awareness of OSH
caused by communication distortion in the company on workers' be-
havior towards social reality as something complex, continuously
evolving and full of meaning. In the development of Axel Honneth's
conceptual dimensions of recognition theory (love, rights and solidar-
ity) has a central role and solution in the distortion of corporate com-
munication, especially in the implementation of OSH programs that
emphasize the importance of recognizing worker relationships and
developing self-confidence, self-respect and self-esteem, in the con-
text of Good Corporate Governance (GCG) and Governance Risk and
Compliance (GRC), recognition theory provides implications for the
importance of recognizing workers’ contributions to the goals
achieved in the company, thereby increasing workers' dignity and in-
dividual values in the company.
*Corresponding author:
E-mail:
yadihse@gmail.com
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 237 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
Without social recognition, OSH will not be able to serve as opera-
tional barometer of a start-up company. It will only serve as a framing
to protect the company, “as if” it already fulfills its legal obligations
towards OSH.
Keywords: Axel Honneth, Disrespect, Interpretive-Critique, Recogni-
tion, Work Safety
Introduction
Corporate communication creates a system
of cooperation so that each member can partic-
ipate and have influence in the organization.
The growth and efficiency of an organization
depends on how effectively workers are in-
volved in enforcing an Occupational Safety and
Health (OSH) culture in the company. Compa-
nies strive to create OSH as an identity, symbol,
and prerequisite for gaining respect from the
industrial sector, as the implementation of OSH
is a normative imperative stipulated in Law No.
1/1970. In general, rules are only the basis for
worker behavior standards. There are two be-
havioral approaches in OSH communication
practices in companies: (1) do the things right,
which means following the rules. This does not
necessarily resolve OSH problems, as ‘rules’ at
the minimum only regulate employee behavior
and (2) do the right things, which is moral in
nature, which allows workers to act and behave
according to their nature because what is out-
lined in the rules does not always reflect free
will, so in the end each worker must find a way
to do what’s best.
The development of worker behavior in the
company is facilitated by: (1) teleological ethi-
cal reasoning as the foundational principle of
behavioral norms that are associated with the
goal in mind. The achievement of goals is the
factor that determines whether one's actions
are good or bad so that goals become the stand-
ard; (2) moral behavior from a de-ontological
point of view implies that the decision maker
determines whether or not the action is inter-
preted as an attempt to demonstrate personal
integrity; and (3) ethical codes of virtue or ex-
cellence that indicate that this practice is used
as a benefit in ethics. The existence of these
views did not emerge drastically; rather, they
evolved from the workplace environment, ex-
periences, traditions, and shared existence in
their communities that place value on human
life. From a historical perspective, a culture or
group would claim that this is the most im-
portant aspect to consider in the organization.
Company policies should ideally be devel-
oped based on experience and tested repeat-
edly until the rules are credible. All rules are in-
herently beneficial, but they are not completely
exempt of interpretation or evaluation. The
dignity of the employee should be taken into
consideration when creating company rules or
policies that demonstrate the extent of respect
the company gives to its employees. As a result,
the rules and procedures of OSH should be
thoroughly tested in order to increase aware-
ness of them among workers; after reading the
rules and regulations, workers should be able
to comprehend and accept them with common
sense.
OSH is a value that should be championed
as a belief system, not merely viewed as an ob-
ligation to comply with relevant regulations. In
essence, OSH is effectively adopted if compa-
nies view workers as assets and that can only
be achieved if there is mutual respect and mu-
tual recognition (Honneth, 1995). Norms and
values can only be accepted as legitimate if in-
dividuals can reach consensus on their implica-
tions and benefits for advancing their interests
(Poespowardojo, Seran, 2016: 168).Work-re-
lated stress causes low self-esteem and com-
munication issues within the company. Em-
ployees can show creative tendencies and have
the capacity to be themselves regarding their
objectives while working (Krijnen, C., 2017:
540). Claiming the critique of OSH recognition
of corporate culture is done by revitalizing the
organizational structure against an under-
standing that is limited by economic practice by
seeing relationships in the production process
as the only way to achieve corporate goals to-
wards a communication practice that
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 238 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
integrates corporate social relations with OSH
goals. The conflict over recognition as a worker
is resolved through the removal of the pseudo-
consciousness that has been colonized by an
ideology (Poespowardojo, Seran, 2016: 162).
Literature Review
There are five concepts that workers
should consider in maintaining good communi-
cation in the workplace according to Ronda
(2018: 80-81; Ruben & Stewart, 2014; Barton &
Beck, 2005). They are (1) understanding the
company's goals; (2) knowing roles and re-
sponsibilities; (3) coordination in the execution
of work; (4) developing a corporate culture;
and (5) establishing a communication network.
The characteristics of OSH communication are
transactional, positional and transformative,
requiring effective collaboration and active
participation between workers and leaders.
Within the overall structure in the company,
OSH communication is always set within an or-
ganizational structure that emphasizes author-
ity, specialization, and order (Littlejohn et al.,
2017: 320), with further emphasis on intersub-
jective reciprocity and recognition (Honneth,
1995).
A company is composed of interconnected
individual actions (Pace & Faules, 2018); there-
fore, they are impossible to dissociate from the
constant education of their employees. The
learning process increases the company's ca-
pacity to alter and evolve as a continual im-
provement. Therefore, the process of learning
must be facilitated by a functional intersubjec-
tive communication process that promotes the
optimization of the process in order to create
an OSH culture in the company. Each company
and individual has a singular culture that is
characterized by distinct elements that create
traditions of behavior and include rules, values,
rituals, and communication processes that are
specific to the company and individual. (Cham-
poux, 2017: 124; Alvesson dan Berg, 1992:
123). In actuality, in companies, Neilson (1996)
in Dua. M (2022: 147) states that many superi-
ors believe that they are powerholders whose
job is to issue orders, apply punishment and
threat mechanisms without conducting effec-
tive communication, and that the task of work-
ers is simply to execute orders. This condition
is common in single loop learning process due
to the absence of dialogue and the increase of
disrespect, leading to the lack of mutual re-
spect. In this case, OSH is not viewed a value.
The company's culture of OSH is communi-
cated through messages in the context of
communication so that others can understand
and accept it (Deetz, 1982: 133). As a conse-
quence, OSH culture can be defined norma-
tively as the belief among workers that OSH
culture is a norm, attitude, role, social, and
technical practice (Dekker, S. 2015: 245),
shared values, cognition, commitment, commu-
nication (Chen et al., 2018), related to reducing
exposure to perceived unsafe or adverse cir-
cumstances that affect their safety behavior
(Aytac dan Dursun, 2018) and have a long-term
impact on OSH behavior. OSH actions are di-
rective and imperative, so workers must first
be willing to accept authoritative OSH mes-
sages by giving authority in the OSH communi-
cation system and filling OSH positions with
competent workers (Barnard 1966: 217-218),
which is the most important contribution
needed from workers so that OSH programs
can be implemented and create OSH “agents of
change” in the company.
Communication errors in companies that
occur distort the truth and lead to ambiguity
and thus become a barrier to the
implementation of OSH programs. In
Habermas' perspective, there are three types of
worker’s distorted expression, including (1)
the use of symbols; communication does not
follow a consensus, (2) individual behavior that
is repetitive (stereotype style), and (3) the
emergence of social pathology (Honneth,
2009). Habermas' psychoanalytic approach
provides an explanatory model for unpacking
social pathology in companies, where there is a
possibility that the social consensus reached in
communication is the result of coercion which
results in systematically distorted
communication (Lawlor, 2013:150; Habermas,
1987).
Honneth's recognition theory underlines
that humans as social beings emphasize mutual
respect and the importance of social relations.
Each individual has an obligation to bring
themselves to adapt and communicate in their
environment so that intact social relations and
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 239 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
respectful relationships between individuals
are formed, and at the end point, each
individual can be fulfilled at three levels of
recognition, namely love, rights and solidarity,
and the formation of a community structure
that develops as a result of moral struggle
(Hazeldine, 2017: 149). Honneth's recognition
theory is a progressive development of the
Frankfurt School's third generation of social
criticism, which follows on from Jürgen Haber-
mas' project of renewing the emphasis on
emancipatory social theory. Honneth's ap-
proach refers to the intersubjective turn taken
from the writings of Hegel of the early Jena pe-
riod, to the subject's experience of disrespect.
In its construct, Honneth's recognition theory
not only examines the recognition of individual
subjects, but also dynamic social interactions in
which subjects are gradually integrated into so-
cial norms and practices that give rise to mu-
tual recognition of intersubjectivity (Pada RT,
2017).
The concept of recognition theory does not
mean to excuse the forced creation of an indi-
vidual, but rather is a means of validating the
rationality of a subject in their social environ-
ment by observing the norms that govern indi-
viduality. The theory of recognition, which is
derived from social values via the identification
of norms in social interactions and relation-
ships, not only describes the subject as an indi-
vidual, but also as a normative mechanism. The
community participates in the process actively,
which means that the recognition action begins
when a person learns how to differentiate their
personal concerns from their responsibilities.
(Honneth, 1995:74-75).
The concept of Honneth’s recognition is not
separable from Hegel’s idea of ethical life (Sit-
tlichkeit). Honneth explains that gradual indi-
vidual self-reflective interactions fall into the
wider scope of social interactions regulated by
norms (Honneth 1995: 78). Therefore, in order
to repair social structures, companies becom-
ing lebenswelt and providing support to the de-
velopment of their members is an unnegotiable
need, as a pre-condition or as a basic social
grammar of the structure of societal progress
(Seran. A, 2013; Honneth, 1995).
Research Methods
Research methodology is concerned with
the overall strategy for research, which in-
cludes a theoretical foundation and a philo-
sophical framework that is interpretive-critical
in nature and that employs the phenomenolog-
ical method as a means of building the meaning
of OSH in the social aspects of workers’
everyday lives and the individual's awareness
of their social position (Schutz, 1967) which is
often ideologically distorted. According to
Deetz (1982: 132) the interpretive-critical ap-
proach is part of the development of new theo-
ries and offers different perspectives in corpo-
rate communication. It is a blend of paradigms,
as Geertz's blurred genre (Geertz, C, 1980).
This gives color to epistemology, proliferation
of destruction of the dominant paradigm, rejec-
tion of the norms of objectivity, and leads to
progressiveness (Denzin N.K, 2010: 422;
Dillard, 2006: 64; Nespor, 2006:124).
In Schutz's phenomenological method, in
the process of typification, humans as subjects
always create meaning outside the scope of ex-
perience. Typification is a process of formaliza-
tion and abstraction used to categorize objects
based on certain types of characters. So, the
meaning relationship in this process was re-
ferred to as the stock of knowledge (Schutz,
1967), which was a set of experience which
then influenced constructed meanings in
thoughts, attitudes, behaviors, which were im-
plemented in reality. Data sources, techniques
and data analysis were based on informants,
through direct observation, literature study
and in-depth interviews through unstructured
interviews. Thus, in the next process, validity
testing was carried out to meet the Goodness
Criteria (Lincoln dan Guba, 1986: 77, 1985) and
continuous data analysis until saturation by re-
ducing data according to the steps of Schutzian
phenomenology.
Results and Discussion
Communication distortion occurs within a
company due to the lack of communication to
respect the authority of each line management,
such as the direct interference of the board of
directors and the top-level management
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 240 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
without involving supervisors in communi-
cating with workers. This results in supervisors
and employees feeling disheartened and unap-
preciated. In the culture of work in Indonesia,
the position and authority associated with a
company's organizational structure has its own
significance. The feeling of prestige associated
with the position one holds represents a form
of recognition of the worker's accomplish-
ments. If ignored, then, the ‘feeling’ of not being
recognized could manifest. Communication re-
lationships in the implementation of OSH are
the basis for cohesiveness, between workers
and leaders, thus, communication actions as a
manifestation of interaction between workers
and leaders towards the implementation of
OSH in the organization are very important.
From the verification of research findings, it
was evident that employees were displeased
with the conditions they were experiencing,
which ultimately results in them not receiving
the ‘message-information’ clearly and instead
strictly performing their duties according to
the orders of their superiors. Employees can-
not share in the initiative and creativity of their
company because of the lack of autonomy
granted to them by their supervisors. The fail-
ure of leadership communication in the com-
pany has an impact on the implementation of
OSH programs. According to Brown, J.,
(2022:141-143) the primary cause of work-
place injuries is the failure of leadership to
communicate safety culture Instead of visual
components, such as the installation of OSH
banners or posters in the workplace, the use of
intersubjective communication is more effec-
tive.
Communication distortion occurs within a
company can be mitigated by improving the in-
ternal communication of the organization. Ef-
fective communication can promote self-es-
teem. OSH communication that conceptualizes
OSH as a company system is crucial to prevent
accidents at work. Effective communication be-
tween the leaders and employees can only hap-
pen with positive collaboration (Musheke, M.
dan Phiri, J., 2021:662). The experience of dis-
respect in the company inspires employees to
strive for recognition and as a means of solidar-
ity. Division of labor is one example of recogni-
tion. If employees are only viewed as resources,
then it would follow that they would fight for
their rights (Groutsis. et al. 2020:7; Honneth,
2010:223-240). One unique aspect of employ-
ment is the real-world nature of the work and
finding ways to execute duties according to the
company's regulations, directions, and strate-
gies. This aspect allows every employee to be
creative as a means of self-expression (Angella,
2016:13).
Company compliance in the fulfillment of
workers' rights should be applied as a set of
principles and practices aimed at ensuring that
companies are managed in a responsible and
ethical manner, as compliance with Good Cor-
porate Governance (GCG) is necessary for com-
panies that want to maintain their compliance
with regulations and laws and promotes trans-
parency and accountability. In the context of
OSH, a procedure serves as a guide for both the
employee and the company in regards to recog-
nizing and addressing hazards associated with
OSH, conducting training, providing personal
protection equipment, and evaluating the effec-
tiveness of OSH programs. The method of eval-
uating the company's compliance with OSH
policies and procedures is to conduct OSH au-
dits, investigate accidents that occur at work,
conduct risk assessments, and making sure all
relevant documentation is accessible to work-
ers. These activities are examples of Govern-
ance, Risk and Compliance (GRC).
Work is a common practice that is formal-
ized in the company's structure. The purpose of
organizing workers by their abilities is to un-
derstand what is required and what is given
(Honneth, 2014:53). Companies must educate
workers about the normative requirements of
the workplace, as this is essential to the recog-
nition process. The objective is to have “negli-
gence” in the implementation of OSH elimi-
nated. Recognition must be granted institution-
ally by the company, its actions must be posi-
tive (Honneth, A., van den Brink, B., & Owen, D.,
2007) in order to allow workers to relate to
each other positively, both among themselves
and with the leaders, which ultimately results
in common norms. As expressed by Honneth,
institutions are a congregation of standards of
behavior that are formally mandated (Honneth,
2014:45).
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 241 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
According to Honneth (2010), working con-
ditions in a company are a means of endeavor,
whether individual or group, for emancipation,
with the strategy of associating mutual recog-
nition to obtain normative expectations (An-
gella. M., 2016). Workers' experience of disre-
spect conditions results in somatic-psychologi-
cal symptoms because they feel depressed,
which ultimately causes hurt, annoyance, and
even resentment towards the company or its
leaders. Honneth believes that experiences of
disrespect are typically accompanied by emo-
tional experiences, these are forms of indirect
recognition that are concealed beneath the sur-
face (Honneth, 1995:136).
OSH training is part of the culture building
and action learning process that requires com-
mitment and consistency, and communication
is the main factor and positive interaction be-
tween workers and leaders to get mutual
recognition and communication is the medium
in the process. OSH training is part of the cul-
ture and learning process that involves com-
mitment and consistency, communication is
the paramount factor and the positive interac-
tion between workers and leaders is its main
attribute. Work is a profession that should be
rewarded and recognized by the company. If
their work is a profession, it means that it is not
an individual action, but relates to other peo-
ple, which will simultaneously construct and
build their actualization in the company where
they are based, as part of a company that is
bound by norms, values and rules concerning
its responsibilities (Dua M, 2021:313). How-
ever, recognition is still necessary as it is a non-
negotiable condition. Fundamental to recogni-
tion theory is the conception of freedom as in-
tersubjectively constituted through mutual
recognition. The reproduction of social life is
governed by the need to recognize each other
(Honneth1995: 92). Honneth views work as a
solid means for individual endeavor. By work-
ing, individuals not only contribute to material
reproduction (welfare), but also to the for-
mation of identity and the division of labor
(Honneth, 1995).
Explicitly, companies can facilitate the real-
ization of workers' creativity, expression, coop-
eration and autonomy, as well as psychic
strength by elaborating the challenges that
workers would face at work, enhancing the in-
dividual's own subjectivity and the quality of
production. These processes can be regarded
as intersubjective emancipation processes (An-
gella. M, 2016:5; Honneth, 1995). Recognition
is crucial to the attainment of freedom through
communication between workers and manag-
ers in a corporation. Freedom in regards to
recognition is derived from the collective
power of solidarity, which enables workers to
no longer have to compete with each other, and
solidarity becomes a factor that promotes de-
velopment in the social organization that is in-
ternal to the company. The realization of free-
dom is contingent on the appreciation and
recognition of workers' contributions to the
company or outside of the company via self-im-
provement (Honneth, 1995: 128-129).
The understanding of OSH as a culture of
love is broad. Love, as the first space for recog-
nition, places individuals on the basis of norma-
tivity that is always present, not as recipients of
rights or norms, but as participants in the legal-
ization of norms that are intersubjective in the
context of OSH in the company.
In reality, we can use the form of mutual
recognition in the company to map the level of
practical relationships between individuals,
differences in meaning and differences in mu-
tual relationships between the three forms of
recognition concepts: (1) love; (2) right/re-
spect; and (3) solidarity, which facilitates the
thought process that involves recognizing that
the different definitions of OSH, that exist
among workers and leaders, must still be con-
sidered legitimate perspectives and have an ef-
fect on individual behavior and relationships.
The definition of OSH causes people to concur
in the desire to live safely, comfortably and
healthily, which is important and necessary in
human life. From a business and corporate per-
spective, it's crucial to the survival of a business
and a contractual obligation to land a project.
OSH is not only seen as values, but also materi-
als. It can only exist as reciprocity in giving
meaning to oneself and others.
According to Szhutz (1967:123), OSH is an
intersubjective social construction that is also
the social construction of others. This implies
that OSH is a component of life that is impossi-
ble to change for the personal life of the
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 242 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
individual or the lives of others or companies.
The significance of the role of OSH cannot be
overlooked, as Honneth stated, companies are
dependent on principles that bind their mem-
bers together through recognition (Marcelo G,
2013:211), and thus, the recognition of OSH has
become essential for companies.The develop-
ment of the concept of recognition theory by
Axel Honneth has a significant role in the
resolution of communication distortion. The
work experience dimension (stock of working
knowledge) as a new dimension in enhancing
Honneth's recognition theory, which concerns
the knowledge and experience that workers
possess, focuses on the practical application of
useful expertise and knowledge that focus on
substance, meaning, intensity, and duration of
knowledge of their experience that is intended
to enhance the awareness of OSH in the com-
pany and improve communication regarding
OSH.
Reflection
Understanding OSH's recognition as a criti-
cism of the company's culture provides an in-
sight to the importance of the theory of recog-
nition in intersubjective communication re-
lated to the implementation of OSH. OSH does
not always serve as a barometer of the compa-
ny's normative compliance with it, because in
many cases it is just a façade to protect the com-
pany, to give the impression that they have ful-
filled their obligations. Providing recognition
within the company is essential for the im-
provement of workers' self-confidence, self-re-
spect and self-esteem, as well as the advance-
ment of company productivity. Without it, in-
ternal conflict would arise, and workers would
attempt to seek recognition on their own, at-
tempting to emancipate themselves.
Acknowledgement
This paper and the research, it would not
have been possible without the exceptional
support of my promotor (Dr. Mirza Ronda M.Si)
dan co-promotor (Dr. Alexander Seran M.A).
Their enthusiasm, knowledge and exacting at-
tention to detail have been an inspiration and
kept my work on track. Nobody has been more
important to me in the pursuit of this rsearch
than the members of my family. I would like to
thank my parents, whose love and guidance are
with me in whatever I pursue. They are the ul-
timate role models. Most importantly, I wish to
thank my loving and supportive wife, Rahayu
Savitri S.Kep., M, Kep, and my two wonderful
children, Rajendra Kusmayadi and Raisayyala
Kusmayadi, who provide unending inspiration.
Conclusion
OSH in the workplace is a combination of
the stock of knowledge of workers who on av-
erage have work experience, as a form of en-
deavor in defining workers' rights, and provid-
ing constructive criticism as a communicative
aimed at getting recognition. Safety as OSH cul-
ture can be interpreted and institutionalized
through acts of intersubjective communication.
The process of actualizing OSH is a progression
that is primarily derived from employees be-
cause they want to be safe and secure, so it can
be said that the actualization of OSH as a cul-
ture in the company is created in the context of
formality alone, because the process of self-ac-
tualization of workers towards OSH as a culture
is a process in which a person can develop their
potential and achieve their goals. Actualizing
OSH in a company requires recognition of re-
ciprocal relationships, intersubjective relation-
ships and recognition as basic relationships
that can provide increased self-actualization of
workers.
References
1. Angella, M. (2016). Work, recognition and
subjectivity: Relocating the connection be-
tween work and social pathologies. Euro-
pean Journal of Social Theory, 19(3), 340–
354.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431015594
443
2. Aytac, S., & Dursun, S. (2018). The effect on
the safety culture of occupational accidents
and safety behavior: The case of Turkey. In-
ternational Academic Conference 38th, Pra-
gue, 20-28.
https://doi.org/10.20472/IAC.2018.038.0
05.
3. Barnard, C. I. (1966). The functions of the ex-
ecutive. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univer-
sity Press
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 243 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
4. Brown, J. (2022). Safety Culture and Com-
munication in a Fulfillment Center: A Case
Study. Open Journal of Leadership, 11, 140-
145.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ojl.2022.112009
5. Champoux, J.E. (2017). Organizational Be-
havior: Integrating Individuals, Groups, and
Organizations (5th Ed). Routledge.
6. Chen, Wei Tong & Chao, Wei & Wang, & Lu,
Shih-Tong & Pan, Nai-Hsin. (2018). The im-
pact of safety culture on safety performance-
a case study of Taiwan’s construction indus-
try. 1. The international Journal of Organi-
zation Innovation. 11-1, 1-16.
https://www.ijoi-online.org/attach-
ments/article/60/0819%20Final.pdf
7. Denzin, N. K. (2010). Moments, Mixed Meth-
ods, and Paradigm Dialogs. Qualitative In-
quiry, 16(6), 419–427. Doi:
10.1177/1077800410364608
8. Dua, M (2021). Profession is a Moral Com-
munity. Respons: Jurnal Etika Sosial,
25(02), 159–163.
https://doi.org/10.25170/re-
spons.v25i02.2472
9. Dua, M (2022). Nilai Inti Universitas Katolik
di Indonesia: Pengembangan Budaya Perus-
ahaan Berdasarkan Moral Exemplars. Re-
spons: Jurnal Etika Sosial, 24(02), 11–40.
https://ejournal.atmajaya.ac.id/in-
dex.php/respons/article/view/3195
10. Dekker, S. (2015). Safety Differently: Human
Factors for a New Era, Second Edition. CRC
Press.
11. Deetz, Stanley. (1982). Critical Interpretive
Research in Organizational Communication.
Western Journal of Communication (in-
cludes Communication Reports). 46.131-
149 Doi: 10.1080/10570318209374073.
12. Geertz, C. (1980). Blurred Genres: The Refig-
uration of Social Thought. The American
Scholar, 49(2), 165–179.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41210607
13. Groutsis, D., Vassilopoulou, J., Kyriakidou,
O., & Özbilgin, M. F. (2020). The ‘New’ Mi-
gration for Work Phenomenon: The Pursuit
of Emancipation and Recognition in the Con-
text of Work. Work, Employment and Soci-
ety, 34(5), 864–882.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017019872
651
14. Hazeldine G. (2017) Pathologies of Recogni-
tion: Axel Honneth and the Renewed Possi-
bility of a Critical Theory of Society, Soci-
ologija. Mintis ir veiksmas, 40(1), pp. 135-
172. Doi:
10.15388/SocMintVei.2017.1.10886.
15. Honneth. Axel (1995). Struggle for Recogni-
tion: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts.
Trans. Joel Anderson. Cambridge: Polity
Press
16. Honneth. Axel (2009). Pathologies of Rea-
son. Trans. By James Ingram et al New York:
Columbia University Press
17. Honneth. Axel (2010) Work and recogni-
tion: a redefinition. In: Schmidt am Bush HC,
Zurn CF (eds.) The Philosophy of Recogni-
tion: Historical and Contemporary Perspec-
tives. Plymouth: Lexington Books
18. Honneth. Axel (2014). Freedom’s Right: The
Social Foundations of Democratic Life.
Trans. By Joseph Ganahl. Columbia Univer-
sity Press.
19. Honneth, A., van den Brink, B., & Owen, D.
(2007). Recognition as Ideology. Recogni-
tion and Power, 323–347. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press
20. Krijnen, Christian (2017). Comprehending
Sociality: Hegel Beyond his Appropriation in
Contemporary Philosophy of Recognition.
Hegel Bulletin 38 (2):266-292.
21. Lawlor, Leonard (2013). Phenomenology:
Responses and Developments. Routledge
22. Littlejohn, Stephen W, Foss, Karen A (2017)
Theories of Human Communication. Edition
11th edition. Waveland Press
23. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it
rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity
in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions
for Program Evaluation, 1986(30), 73–84.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1427
24. Marcelo, Gonçalo (2013) Recognition and
Critical Theory Today: An Interview with
Axel Honneth. Philosophy and Social Criti-
cism. Vol. 39 (2): 209 – 221.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453712470
361
25. Musheke, M. and Phiri, J. (2021) The Effects
of Effective Communication on Organiza-
tional Performance Based on the Systems
Theory. Open Journal of Business and
Kusmayadi et al., 2023 / Understanding the Recognition of Occupational Safety and Health
IJSSR | Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research 244 Volume 4 | Number 2 | December | 2023
Management, 9, 659-671.
doi: 10.4236/ojbm.2021.92034
26. Pace, R. W., & Faules, D. F. (2018). Komu-
nikasi Perusahaan. Strategi Meningkatkan
Kinerja Perusahaan. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Bandung.
27. Pada, Roland Theuas (2017). Axel Hon-
neth's social philosophy of recognition: free-
dom, normativity
28. Poespowardojo, S., & Seran, A. (2016).
Diskursus Teori-Teori Kritis. Jakarta:
Kompas Media Nusantara
29. Ronda, Andi Mirza (2018). Tafsir Kontem-
porer Ilmu Komunikasi. Tangerang. Yayasan
Kompatibel. Indigo Media
30. Seran, Alexander (2013). Emansipasi Se-
bagai Tata Bahasa Telaah Filsafat Moral
Axel Honneth Tentang Multikultural-
isme. Areté 02. https://core.ac.uk/dis-
play/157710869
31. Schutz, A (1967). The phenomenology of so-
cial world. Translated by George Walsh, an
Introduction by Frederick Lehnert and
George Walsh, Northwestern University
Press
32. Undang – Undang Republik Indonesia No-
mor 1 Tahun (1970) tentang Keselamatan
Kerja. https://jdih.kemnaker.go.id/as-
set/data_puu/peraturan_file_32.pdf.
