P25 · Ethics · Cognitive harm in organisations
Cognitive harm in organisations — a working hypothesis with a prevention frame
Established science and law first; then an original term treated as a research programme, not a proven thesis. Hierarchical prevention can already be applied. DOC-2026-NOCOG-001 · rev.06-C.
François Dorléans · 29 August 2026 · FR rev.06-C · partner comments locked
Partner review (protected): each section has a #tag. Comments blocked for the public until ?role=partner.
Contents
- 1. Introduction and purpose
- 2. Part 0 — Industrial prevention frame
- 3. Hierarchy of controls applied to the risk
- 4. Level 1 — Elimination at the organisational source
- 5. Level 2 — Substitution of risky deliberation
- 6. Level 3 — Isolate facts from direct pressure
- 7. Level 4 — Change how groups deliberate and recant
- 8. Level 5 — Individual protection as last resort
- 9. Follow-up indicators and limits of Part 0
- 10. Established scientific frames
- 11. International legal and normative frame
- 12. Cognitive leadership in extreme settings
- 13. Epistemic status of the term
- 14. What the term seeks to name
- 15. Research programme
- 16. Aggravating organisational factors
- 17. Documented consequences of psychosocial risks
- 18. Operational recommendations
- 19. Conclusion
- 20. Macroeconomic framing of the debate
- 21. List of references
- 22. Definition of acronyms
2. Part 0 — Industrial prevention frame
3. Hierarchy of controls applied to the risk
4. Level 1 — Elimination at the organisational source
5. Level 2 — Substitution of risky deliberation
6. Level 3 — Isolate facts from direct pressure
7. Level 4 — Change how groups deliberate and recant
8. Level 5 — Individual protection as last resort
9. Follow-up indicators and limits of Part 0
10. Established scientific frames
11. International legal and normative frame
12. Cognitive leadership in extreme settings
13. Epistemic status of the term
14. What the term seeks to name
15. Research programme
16. Aggravating organisational factors
17. Documented consequences of psychosocial risks
18. Operational recommendations
19. Conclusion
20. Macroeconomic framing of the debate
| Scope | Indicator | Annual amount | Share of GDP |
|---|---|---|---|
| European Union | Work-related disease and accident societal cost (EU-OSHA / ILO) | ≈ €476 bn | 3.3 % |
| Europe | Work-related depression (Matrix 2013) | ≈ €617 bn | ≈ 3.4 % |
| United States | Occupational stress (American Institute of Stress) | ≈ $300 bn | ≈ 1.0 % |
| World | Depression and anxiety productivity loss (WHO) | ≈ $1,000 bn | Not calculated by the source |
| World | Disengagement at work (Gallup 2026) | ≈ $10,000 bn | 9 % |
21. List of references
22. Definition of acronyms
Base dossier · PDF rév.06-C Present · DFKPS Ethics I.07 Hierarchy of Controls P21 Culture of good sense