No theory forbids me to say "Ah!" or "Ugh!", but it forbids me the bogus theorization of my "Ah!" and "Ugh!" - the value judgments. - Theodor Julius Geiger (1960)

Work is always ambivalent

In work, creation and destruction, satisfaction and depletion, go together. Work produces value, but also depletes nature, strains people, and consumes both time and health. To ignore this tension is to blind ourselves to risk.

Sociologist Lars Clausen saw a crisis of recognition and placement, but not of work itself (Clausen, 1988). Clausen mapped work into four quadrants (see my English version in the figure above; but Clausen's version in his book is much more detailed!). Each quadrant shows a different way societies and organisations organise labour:

1. On the 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵, work is a commodity, exchanged for money and reward;
2. In conflict (𝘸𝘢𝘳), work is destructive counter-labour, e.g. robbery, extortion, violence;
3. Forced labour (𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘯) is work under coercion, which is sometimes productive, sometimes destructive;
4. Patronage work (𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘭) is work maintained by alimony, flattery, or destructive hypocrisy.

Organisations slide between these logics more than they admit. Whenever they rely on fear, secrecy, or factional rewards, they drift out of the market into war, fron, or serail, and their outcomes follow. Destructive work harms yet pursues an end (e.g. rivalry, war). Annihilating activity voids meaning itself (e.g. senseless forced labour).

Where there is no ritual of acknowledgement, rituals of escape take root instead. Rituals from ancient work songs to communal feasts to retirement parties transform toil into satisfaction. They are a capability for meaning, because when rituals collapse, work tips into depletion.

Clausen also wrote about technology: Every tool encodes trade-offs (use, value, and protection). For instance, an AI copilot is a social contract. Good governance asks whose risks are built in, and what rituals preserve meaning? Automation and bureaucracy don’t take away work, but they do hide it. The real question is not if work is ending, but where is it reappearing, and in what form?

Leaders who only recognise formal roles overlook the invisible labour that sustains their organisations. Clausen identifies denied work (schoolwork, housework, care, art, bureaucracy, prison labour, even organised crime), and shadow work (moonlighting, off-the-books construction, informal care). Leisure, too, is work-like. Hobbies, clubs, and sport reproduce discipline, networks, and capital. Talent, innovation, and wellbeing flourish here. Organisations that respect this space retain people better than those that enforce rigid “work-life separation”.

What's your concept of work? Test it against the rituals, rhythms, destructions, and satisfactions you encounter in the factory, the office, online, and at home. Once you see the camouflaged labour that holds your world together, it is difficult to unsee it.

Reference: Clausen, L. (1988), 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘬𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘵, 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘬𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘵, Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.

“Are we not destroying more than we are building? Is our work truly productive, or rather destructive? Must we become critical of work itself?
Another voice answers: ‘Your worries I would like to have. I am unemployed—and unemployment is rising. I would gladly work on a rubbish dump if only I had the chance.’
A third voice says brightly: ‘I work twelve to fourteen hours a day, and I still enjoy it. For the first time, I feel needed, and I can contribute.’

All of this is work. The question is not whether work is only good or only bad—but how it mixes creation and destruction in every society.”

Lars Clausen, Produktive Arbeit, destruktive Arbeit (1988)