Looking at the happy side (or not) of organizations

Companies are always looking to differentiate themselves and thus be able to be more successful in the competition in which they operate in an increasingly open and globalized market. Therefore, although with caution, new approaches and trends often turn into fashions. And as in many fashions it becomes more important what it looks like than what it is. Today concerns about well-being and prevention of psychosocial risks have reached some companies. But from the application of plans with scientific evidence to the promotion of healthy workplaces, with a guaranteed return on investment, we have quickly jumped to ocasional happiness initiatives. After some time we have forgotten what gave rise to the concern and effort, and as it is fashionable we see everyone doing the same kind of initiatives that promise happy workers, indeed more like marketing than reality, as happened with the old FNAT - National Federation for Joy at Work , here in Portugal, before April 25, 1974. Sometimes well-being was replaced by wellness too. They are different but often confused. In a while, we do the math, and we realize that there are no expected results and we throw the baby out with the bath water, that is, we stop investing in what is critical for people's health at work and for more sustainable organizations (or we never get to invest) at the same time as we change of fashion. Let's look to what psychology and psychologists have to say and use what science can give us to work and live better in our organizations that are made of behaviors, emotions, motivations and decisions. Looking at the well-being side of organizations.

Psychology and climate crisis

Signing the Lisbon Resolution

For too many years psychology has been too much away from environment issues. Even when psychology is used psychologists are not there applying it. As citizens, as professionals or as scientists we have to stand up and advocate for psychology in climate change action, not only dealing with the psychological consequences of climate change but working on prevention, behaviour change and decision making processes.

F. Rodrigues, M. R. de Sousa, A. Sales e A. Evans

Last November, in Lisbon, more than 40 psychologists organizations meet to address climate change challenges and commit with a joint action and a resolution. The Summit on Psychology and Global Health was an historical event for psychologists around the world, but also for all citizens, because of all the benefits it can mean and bring to this fight. All organizations present their work on this field and their goals for the future.  Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, Portugal's President, in his speech at the Summit, thanked the psychologists for their role in society and their contribution to tackle climate crisis, stressing that this is a task for all.

The report of this Summit will be delivered to United Nations Secretary General, António Guterres, and several other international institutions around the world.

We now have the responsibility to work together, with our behaviours and our knowledge, doing everything we can to advocate for the use of psychology and human behaviour scientific knowledge on this collective effort. 

Talking with Telmo Mourinho Baptista, EFPA President

Telmo Mourinho Baptista, EFPA President

Tomorrow begins the European Congress of Psychology in Moscow, at the same time as Telmo Mourinho Baptista ends his first four-year term as president of the EFPA Executive Council.

What do you think will be the main challenge to psychologists in the near future?

I think the main challenge for psychologist in the near future is to follow the developments that artificial intelligence (AI) is introducing in all kinds of services, including psychology. We are at an important point where we still have the time to participate in the debates that occur around the development of AI and the consequences for the citizens. There are many issues that need to be discussed,  like ethical choices, privacy and psychological consequences of a world that is dominated by Ai, instead of a world that has AI at the service of humankind. This is not farfetched, this future is already here, and we don’t seem to notice it in all the different applications that surround us, like personal assistants (ex: Siri, Alexa) or intelligent homes. I think the participation of psychologists is crucial at the different stages of development, and Europeans have started an important exemple of concern for the development of responsible AI. We must participate in this discussion 

Can you talk a little bit about some of the big issues that you have been advocating being president of the European Federation of Psychologists Association (EFPA)?

I have been advocating in general for a more psychologically informed process of decision. It is strange that with our solid knowledge about human behaviour we do not have a strong voice in policy making. There are already good examples, like the behavioural units that some governments created, but there is ample possibility for the different policies to benefit from psychological knowledge.

I also have been advocating for the development of the Europsy, in order to have more Europeans as Europsy holders.  Europsy is a great achievement, and we need to develop it, and discuss further developments, like specialities, and the competencies that are involved at the different levels. Working with the Universities is a priority, so that they can prepare their students to become Europsy holders.

Another aspect that I have been advocating is for the diversification of services to deal with mental health problems. We need to consider other forms of delivery of services, not just the one on one encounter. Group, organization and community interventions should be more applied. We need also to consider the impact of the digital world as a way of helping to deliver services. This implies new roles for psychologists, and collaboration with other professions in a more ample way. 

What’s the role of psychology for peace worldwide and what do you think that must be improved for that purpose?

Psychology can be of great help in peace processes. Improving communication between opposing parts,  understanding the needs of the people involved, negotiating and mediating conflicts, following up on the achievements to allow for permanent change,  are the type of activities that psychologists are experts. There is strong science that supports psychological interventions in peace processes,  We can assist in the reparation processes, to bring true peace to the hearts of people, allowing them to have a better life.I have seen testimonies of these processes and I wonder why psychologists are not used more in the peace processes. I guess the general public, and even decision makers, don’t know enough go our training and how we can be of help.