Democracy in the healthcare workplace: A critical perspective

A review of existing literature revealed at least two distinct theoretical perspectives or schools of thought which are troubled by problems of the lack of participation in the workplace: Jurgen Habermas' ideal of communicative rationality (1984; 1987); and the field of workplace democracy. Whereas Habermas' ideal of communicative rationality establishes communication as necessary to attain a democratic workplace, the ideal of workplace democracy focuses on a participatory ideal in which conditions of open participation must be fulfilled in order to attain a democratic workplace. This study compared the strengths and weaknesses of the conditions proposed by Habermas with the strengths and weaknesses of the conditions selected to represent the workplace democracy ideal. Two incidents were selected for analysis which occurred within a period of one year within one large healthcare organization. The author was present as a participant-observer to assess these incidents. Each of the conditions for the ideal of communicative rationality and for the workplace democracy ideal was systematically applied to both incidents selected for analysis. The results of the analysis suggested that application of Habermas' theory provided more insight into potential distortions in communication than did the conditions selected to represent workplace democracy. Although the conditions of both models were frequently complementary and even overlapping at times, application of each theory to the same incident produced distinctly different results. ^