Humanitarian Work and Organizational Psychology

Humanitarian simply means putting people first. Humanitarian work and organizational psychology puts people first in at least two major ways. One is by enabling humanitarian workers and organizations (like aid charities, for instance) to become more effective in what they do. The other is by aiming to help make working conditions, regardless of sector or type of work, humanitarian. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the International Labor Organization (ILO) associated the world of work with a range of inhumane and unsustainable working conditions. A ‘new normal’ for working conditions was insecure, precarious work, working poverty, and income inequality. Viewed through this lens, the COVID-19 virus became a disruptor, with the potential to either set back or dramatically advance the preexisting 2016–2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs had been focusing, and subsequently refocused minds even more, on “eradicating poverty in all its forms,” everywhere. A focal point within humanitarian work and organizational psychology is that any eradication of poverty, post COVID-19, must include not simply a return to 2019-style economic slavery-like conditions but unfettered access to sustainable livelihood. Humanitarian work and organizational psychology arguably contributes toward advancing the SDGs, and putting people first, in at least four main ways. Using the metaphor of a house, first its foundations are ethical (serving empowerment rather than power), historical (in humanitarian work and human services like employee assistance programs), conceptual (replacing the idea of “job” with sustainable livelihood), and political (advancing new diplomacies for bending political will to humanitarian evidence and ethics). Second, its levels are systemic, spanning individual (e.g., selecting for humanitarian values), organizational (e.g., helping food banks during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing startup training for business entrepreneurs in low-income neighborhoods), and societal (advocating for humanitarian interventions like wage subsidies and other forms of social protection). Third, its spaces traverse poverty lines; minimum, living, and maximum wages; formal and informal sectors; and transitions and transformations among unemployment, underemployment, and decent work. Fourth, its vistas include promoting livelihood security for all by balancing automation with social protection like universal basic income (UBI), and organizational social responsibility (protecting the biosphere). In these ways we may also sustain our own livelihoods, as humanitarian work and organizational psychologists.