Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

DEPRAVED, DISTRACTED, DISABLED, OR

JUST “PACK RATS”?

WORKPLACE HOARDING PERSONAS IN

PHYSICAL AND VIRTUAL REALMS

JO ANN ORA VEC

ABSTRACT

This article provides some potential directions in exploring the construction of
the persona of the “hoarder” and addresses how such a persona can move to the
foreground of an individual’s set of workplace-related personas. Hoarding throws into
relief some critical concerns about the social standings of individuals in workplaces
and the extent to which they have autonomous expression. The article frames
hoarding in terms of its capacity to externalize particular social issues (such as
environmental problems) and generate public discourse, and examines both physical
hoardings (books and papers in academic and office settings, for example) and
hoardings of virtual goods (such as digital music, video files, and pornographic
images). Virtual hoardings have been constructed as problematic as they create
barriers to the free flow of information in the workplace and can challenge
organizational interests related to intellectual property concerns. Hoarding as a
whole is becoming more tightly circumscribed as a workplace and community
condition, in part because the ability to manage physical and virtual items in confined
settings is considered central to many forms of competent societal functioning.

An assortment of human resource management initiatives to mitigate hoarding
concerns has developed, including the consideration of hoarding as a disability.
However, hoarding behavior is increasing creating problems for those who are
searching for simple definitions or straightforward diagnostic criteria. This article
also provides some structures for analysis of the class-related and economic
dimensions of workplace hoarding personas, and explores potential implications of
lifelogging initiatives and hoarding acceptance approaches.

KEY WORDS

Hoarding, Persona, Workplace disability, Anxiety, Popular culture, Virtual goods, Class,
Lifelogging

INTRODUCTION

A number of individuals openly claim to be “pack rats” and exhibit some level of

disorganization in workplaces (Diekema and Olsen 2261), and they often express sympathy for

those similarly afflicted. However, those who are considered hoarders can receive highly

negative treatment in workplace organizations, often damaging their well-being and careers

(Mataix-Cols 2023; Ronan 249). This article analyzes how individuals in the workplace can

acquire a hoarder persona among their other personas, and explores how this persona can take

Oravec

on a predominant status. As related in the article, treatments of hoarding in popular culture

along with recent psychological research have served to shape workplace discourse on hoarding

as well as expand the implications of hoarding personas, especially in relation to disability and

other workplace considerations. As critics have noted, individuals are associated with more

than one persona (see Broady); however, the “hoarder” persona frequently moves to the

foreground of the personas with which individuals couple themselves and are coupled in

workplace contexts. The hoarding persona has, in recent years, been so overwhelming in its

influence as to shift identities like “creative employee” or “kind friend” into the background. In

the past decade, the notion of hoarding has expanded its place in public discourse in the US and

UK with an assortment of news accounts, self-help books, and television “reality shows”

(Lepselter 919; Weinman 77). Oft-times this workplace hoarder identity is framed in terms of

general notions of disability. If hoarding is, indeed, framed as a disability in organizations, the

impact of being characterized as a hoarder could be considerable and may require the

introduction of mental health and organizational accommodation.

HOARDING CONTEXTS AND HISTORIES

Hoarding can elicit deep emotional connections in many of us, especially those who have
considerable experience working with large collections of artifacts, papers, and books. It can be
difficult to part with items one has a personal connection, such as items owned by a deceased
relative or colleague. Many individuals with academic connections know stories about a staff or
faculty member who has been personally affected by hoarding. For example, the widely-
discussed case of the late Margaret Mary Vojtko of Duquesne University in the US, a French
language instructor (discussed in Ellis), made many academics reconsider their own situations.
Vojtko was an adjunct member of the faculty who accumulated many materials related to the
accomplishments of her students (as well as her own intellectual products) in storage garages
and various spaces granted to her by friends and colleagues. The Collyer Brothers, collectors of
more than 140 tons of material (including many books and newspapers) in a Manhattan
apartment building in the 1940s, have attracted the interest of psychological researchers for
decades (Weiss 251). The Collyer Brothers’ story did not end well: they were both found dead
among their possessions. Hoarding is also becoming an international concern and studies in the
European Union (EU) and US demonstrate that it is a growing phenomenon (Mueller et al. 709).
An article in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry by Paul Fitzgerald
characterizes cases of severe hoarding as “the bowerbird symptom,” reflecting the tendencies of
the animal mentioned to hoard (597). Other social scientists and commentators have referred
to a “hoarding instinct” (Conniff 92) and hoarding behavior has been studied in animals and
humans that are facing certain resource stresses (Bergstrom 10860), However, research on
hoarding has been relatively slow to emerge despite the “significant distress and impairment”
often associated with the condition (Coles et al., 180). Virtual hoarding issues have been even
slower to gain attention from researchers.

The overall relationship of modern society to physical goods has been problematic, so it

is not surprising that hoarding is often portrayed as harmful to personal well-being at home and

at work. Books such as Should the U.S. Reduce Its Consumption? (2011) and The Story of Stuff:

The Impact of Overconsumption on the Planet, Our Communities, and Our Health- And How We

Can Make It Better (2010) remind us that overconsumption is a critical problem, even

threatening, and related to global climate and energy change. Individuals are informed from

many sources that one of the solutions to society’s economic and ecological problems involves

smaller buildings with less “stuff” in them. Despite these anti-consumption initiatives,

individuals also face an onslaught of marketing messages and advertising materials tempting

them to buy even more items; they are also advised by public safety and survivalist groups

about the prospects of impending shortages or dramatically increased prices for goods and

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

services. In Hoarders, Doomsday Preppers, and the Culture of Apocalypse (2014), Foster explores

how individuals deal with projected disasters and crises through hoarding certain kinds of

personal possessions. Hoarding is often the result of chronic shortages during extended periods

of disaster and war (Solnit P2), so new forms of hoarding associated with the recent economic

austerity crises in the US and Europe may emerge. The result of these conflicting messages is

often cognitive dissonance and confusion (Thomas and Mora 1).

The notion that possessions can somehow own or control their owners in dysfunctional

ways has been a persistent theme in Western cultures for some time now. As American author

Henry David Thoreau noted in 1845: “Most of the luxuries, and many of the so-called comforts

of life, are not only not indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of [hu]mankind”

(8). In 1917, British philosopher Bertrand Russell also argued that, “It is preoccupation with

possession, more than anything else, that prevents men [and women] from living freely and

nobly” (154). Today, “voluntary simplifiers” extol the political as well as personal benefits of

reducing one’s physical belongings (Zamwel, Sasson-Levy, and Ben-Porat 199), and frame

personal accumulations in terms of larger environmental problems. Platitudes about the

positive aspects of living with fewer and/or well-organized belongings are, indeed, lofty and

inspiring, but they often fail to recognize the societal demands for competent interactions with

material goods. For example, in order competently to interact with government bureaucracy,

maintain one’s medications and medical apparatus, and arrange for adequate nutrition, one

must acquire and organize substantial quantities of material items. However, navigating the

narrow straits of proper societal functioning in terms of these items can be difficult: how many

things should a normally-functioning employee or household member accumulate? How should

these entities be organized and maintained? American author Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)

reportedly hoarded the letters of his many correspondents, an activity that may have appeared

eccentric at the time, but which has given his biographers an incredible wealth of information

(Rasmussen xiii).

CONTESTED TERRAINS: HOARDING AND THE WORKPLACE

Efforts to characterize “hoarding” can lead to complex and contentious discussions. In

2013, after lengthy debate, “Hoarding Disorder” was included in the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and

Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, published by the American Psychiatric Association). The

label is reportedly intended to cover cases in which hoarding occurs independently from, or in

the absence of, other kinds of mental conditions. The DSM-5 defines Hoarding Disorder as

“persistent difficulty discarding or parting with possessions, regardless of their actual value”

(American Psychiatric Association 236), a behavior that can also be linked with various forms of

anxiety. An often-cited characterization of hoarding is an “excessive form of collectionism”

(Pertusa et al. 372), in which possessions take on extended levels of value and significance.

Distinctions between collectionism (intense focuses on the part of individuals on organizing and
completing assemblages of certain kinds of items) and hoarding (which is generally perceived

as disorganized) are complex and status- or class-related differences often play a role in how

collecting behavior is constructed.

Those who have the means to live with considerable, well-organized possessions are

generally not considered “hoarders” but “collectors.” Nicely-stocked offices, closets, or pantries

are considered the result of diligence; the piles of materials associated with hoarding are

construed in less appreciative terms. The fact that physical possessions often have monetary

dimensions can introduce class-related aspects: individuals who are less well positioned in

relation to their organizational or neighborhood standards can be construed as a hoarder for

retaining a relatively-small number of possessions in the restrictive spaces in which they work

Oravec

or live. In contrast, those who can afford large houses and storage garages, or in workplace

contexts, larger offices and efficient secretarial help, can amass much more before such an

identity moves to the foreground. In fact, almost a third of those surveyed in a number of

Western nations state that they are, indeed, “collectors” of some particular items (Pearce 1).

Belk et al. distinguish between “hoardings” and “collections” in characterizations of how

possessions relate to the construction of self. Collections may be of the same size as hoardings,

but have more specific structures and meanings: “We take collecting to be the selective, active,

and longitudinal acquisition, possession and disposition of an interrelated set of differentiated

objects (material things, ideas, beings or experiences)” (181). Those who collect items are often

driven to add to their accumulations, but at the same time might worry that their newest

acquisitions will somehow “complete” their collections and thus an aspect of their motivation

for continuing to collect may be diminished. The performativity of hoarding behavior, in

contrast, seldom has such specific patterns and motivations, either in terms of the kinds of items

involved or in how they are organized, stored, and acquired. In an effort to determine possible

patterns, some researchers have recently attempted to map the connections between hoarding

and compulsive buying (Lawrence et al. 1137; Mueller et al. 709).

Workplaces are scenes for many kinds of struggles for resources and social standing

between and among individuals, conflicts that can intensify as economic conditions place strains

on organizations. Attention to hoarding in many workplaces has expanded as office space and

other resources become more expensive and the everyday surveillance and oversight of

employees escalates. The workplace has increasingly become “contested terrain” (Edwards and

Edwards vii), with employees and management often perceiving their interests to differ. Part of

this contested terrain notion involves the basic characterization of employees: are they to be

considered autonomous individuals or as entities under the strict control of supervisors? Office

and shop floor décor can play a role in fostering individuality and giving individuals more

leeway in their expressions (Elsbach 99). When employees alter their workspaces through

hoarding they may enter into larger contests and struggles concerning how individuals are

construed and how the scope of activity of supervisors is determined.

A hoarding persona in workplace contexts is performed and expressed by individuals

through various kinds of behavior in relation to physical or virtual items. Some of these

performances may involve the accumulation and stockpiling of particular entities. Other

hoarding performances may enact the neglect of certain functions: hoarders may be confused

about, be unable to replicate, or simply refuse to perform the regular cleaning, arrangement,

and disposal behaviors that are the accepted norms for their workplaces. As described in
sections to come, these performances are generally enacted within the limited stage and scope

of the workplace setting and are circumscribed by the workplace’s economic and cultural

setting. Individuals may adopt the persona of hoarder despite the relatively small size of the

hoardings involved, perhaps because the items in question may appear to lack organization.

The amount of material involved in workplace hoarding can be a tiny fraction of the resources

associated with the organization, but can still be considered a “hoard” by co-workers or clients

(Herring Hoarders 8). Employees who are construed or construe themselves as hoarders are

often linked with the appropriation of resources and physical or virtual space, and manifest

some kind of deviance from accepted, delimited organizational patterns. Many workplaces are

also becoming sites of hoardings of virtual goods, which affects the free flow of organizational

information and raises questions about the competence and diligence of the individuals

involved (Gormley and Gormley 90). On the other hand, employees who are compliant in terms

of physical and virtual resources may be seen as more adaptable: in workplace cultures,

employees who are able to shift their relationships with their possessions and other objects

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

appropriately and quickly in order to meet the assumed needs of institutions are preferable to

those, such as hoarders, who cannot or will not.

HOARDING AND HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DISABILITY STUDIES

Hoarding narratives are becoming a focus of the business community in the US and UK.
For instance, an article in Forbes magazine, a widely-read American financial publication,

described hoarding as a “real” and “tragic” condition, directly countering some of the more

sensationalistic coverage in television and print portrayals (Haiken 1). The persona of the

hoarder in these contexts is often linked to waste and loss although the economic and social

encumbrances that hoarding places on workplaces and communities are difficult to weigh (for

example, the opportunity costs associated with the decreases in functional working space and

the loss of usable items that are hidden from view) (Tolin et al. “The Economic” 200). Although
some workplaces have strict policies about personal belongings or tightly control the amount of

organizational resources that employees can access, others provide enough leeway and

discretion so as to enable hoarding to become a factor (Kim 496; Murphy 22).

The approach of some organizations to hoarding behaviour has been to frame it as a

disability, following the American Psychiatric Association’s classification of “Hoarding Disorder”

(Herring Hoarders 3). However, introducing disability-related themes may also increase the

complexities of the hoarding persona and, in some situations, its stigma. In a positive light, such

a framework could stimulate the allocation of expenditures for counseling or the redesigning of

spaces and tasks. Unfortunately, this would require employer resources in a job market where

resources are often stretched thin and problematic employees more readily dismissed. Like

many human conditions associated with disability in the workplace, individuals are often

labeled as hoarders without professional diagnosis and are managed by concerned others (such

as supervisory personel), who lack the proper professional qualificiations to manage this issue

(Murphy 23): the piles of materials associated with the individual are considered sufficient

evidence. Considering hoarding as a disability could also involve social interventions in

workplace contexts: psychologists are generating a number of narratives pertaining to social

anxieties and the social isolation of hoarders. Some portray these conditions as self-imposed

and others as linked to external triggers (Steketee and Frost 21; Vigne et al. 315).

More detailed and systematic strategies for characterizing and diagnosing hoarding are

emerging. Development of these strategies is made more complex by the vast differences in the

situations and demographics (and, possibly, the neural structures) of individuals associated

with the persona of “hoarder” (Wang et al. 939). For example, hoarding is an activity that affects

multiple demographics. It is reportedly making an appearance among college-aged students

(Coles, Frost, Heimberg, and Steketee 179), who are often present in workplaces for internships

and other early employment opportunities. At the same time, as the number of relatively older

individuals in workplace and community settings rises, compulsive hoarding cases also seem to

be increasing (Ayers et al. 741). In the past decade, efforts to develop diagnostic scales for

hoarding in workplaces and mental health settings have included the 26-item Saving Inventory-

Revised (Coles et al. 179) and the briefer, interview-format Hoarding Rating Scale-Interview

(HRS-I) (Tolin, Frost, and Steketee 147). Another research initiative involves mapping the

linkages of some forms of hoarding to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) (Neal-Barnett and

Mendelson 169). In some workplace settings, hoarding has already been linked with problems

akin to those of OCD (Santuzzi et al. 204), which raises critical questions concerning disclosure

of the conditions involved, potential treatment, and accommodation. Some therapists are using

images of hoardings to diagnose hoarding cases (de la Cruz et al. 61). In one kind of treatment

strategy, images of hoardings are also being employed to mitigate its effects; Jones and Singh

Oravec

have used images of hoarders’ possessions in non-threatening therapy contexts to help

desensitize hoarders to related anxieties (41). Adding to the complexities of diagnosis and

treatment, some theorists have posited that hoarding may in itself serve as a defense

mechanism, serving to shield the individual from even more debilitating behaviour (Hudson

57).

The interpersonal dimensions of hoarding also complicate its construction as a disability

(Grisham, Steketee, and Frost E63): the stereotype of hoarders as isolated loners has been

modified in recent years because many individuals are highly social but also have hoarding

tendencies. Many of those who are portrayed or who self-identify as hoarders are highly

functional in various aspects of their personal and professional realms, possibly even over-

compensating in some areas such as in personal dress and self-maintenance (Steketee and Frost

21). Assisting these highly-functional individuals to find ways to establish control over their

physical and virtual possessions as they have over other aspects of their lives (O’Connor 101;

Woody 324) may empower them to maintain the kinds of routines and everyday activities that

can mitigate the consequences of hoarding behavior. However, many individuals characterized

as hoarders do have considerable difficulties in terms of social interaction (Rasmussen et al.

384). In response, some community approaches to hoarding have involved task forces of

concerned citizens dedicated to dealing in a sensitive manner with the multifaceted issues of

often isolated and frightened individuals (Bratiotis).

HOARDERS, HEAL THYSELVES: SELF-HELP FOR HOARDERS?

Self-help literatures and other simple, low-cost remedies for human maladies have

emerged for hoarding, as they have for many other conditions that have been constructed as

being problematic (such as weight loss and self-esteem issues). Human resource managers (as

well as the general public) might be tempted by the notion that reading a book or watching a

video can help to change or recharacterize behavior. However, societal stigmas are often

reflected in these self-help materials and can muddy attempts to understand hoarding and deal

with its consequences. For example, some popular non-fiction accounts of compulsive buying

(Shulman) can place some kinds of hoarding in the light of avarice and pleasure rather than as a

struggle with serious medical conditions such as OCD (as portrayed in Frost et al. “Compulsive

Buying” 201). Many individuals who are characterized as “overweight” have comparable issues

involving how their situation is construed. Some books have even linked hoarding with weight

issues, such as Breininger’s Stuff Your Face Or Face Your Stuff: The Organized Approach to Lose

Weight by Decluttering Your Life (2013). Discrimination against those who weigh more than a

certain amount in relation to their heights is rampant in many workplace contexts whatever the

roots of their conditions (Magallares, Morales, and Rubio 255) and their physiques are often

openly mocked rather than treated with respect. Those who are labele d as “hoarders” face

comparably negative conditions, although the amount of discrimination in workplaces against
hoarders has yet to be determined (Bratiotis, Schmalisch, and Steketee 10).

A large number of books have emerged that outline specific “how to” steps and self-

therapy strategies for individuals associated with hoarding. Books such as Overcoming

Compulsive Hoarding: Why You Save and How You Can Stop (Bubrick et al.) attempt to deliver

strategies for individuals to overcome their perceived problems. Other approaches incorporate

greater levels of critical self-examination and reproach: Cluttered Lives, Empty Souls: Compulsive

Stealing, Spending, and Hoarding (Shulman) links the hoarding of possessions with various

character faults and even crimes. “Tell all” books such as Dirty Secret: A Daughter Comes Clean

About Her Mother’s Hoarding (Sholl) and Diary of a Hoarder's Daughter (Winter) are designed to

assist individuals through the supposed true-life confessionals of others. Many of the US

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

nationally-syndicated talk shows (including the US television show Dr. Phil) have covered

hoarding issues multiple times (Lepselter 919). Given the widespread dissemination of these

books and television shows, hoarding narratives rooted in workplace and community contexts

apparently have substantial voyeuristic value, particularly in an era of unsettling economic

changes.

Individuals who are linked to hoarding behaviours often produce coherent narratives

and arguments about their situation and can articulate why specific items are retained. The

hoarders themselves have some control over these narratives, but other accounts (such as

reports of health inspectors or other officials) are largely out of their direct spheres of influence.

In The Hoarding Handbook: A Guide for Human Service Professionals, Bratiotis, Schmalisch, and

Steketee state that people are “simultaneously appalled and drawn to the stories of hoarding”

(11), making these narratives attractive yet controversial matter for popular treatment in

media. Moreover, these media narratives are often produced and disseminated by those who

have little personal connection with the hoarders involved. Television series have provided

many amateur workplace diagnosticians with basic knowledge of hoarding. For example, The

Learning Channel (TLC) in the US premiered a documentary series Hoarding: Buried Alive on

March 14, 2010 that served to make its viewers more aware of the condition. The series

provided detailed case studies of individuals who accepted the label of “hoarders” and agreed

(at least at first) to work with both an organizational expert and a psychologist on their

conditions. In these reality TV shows and documentaries, economic conditions are often

connected to hoarding activities . For instance, some individuals rationalize hoarding by

explaining that they had few possessions as children and now do not know how to handle

abundance; others construe the hoarding of everyday items as related to the fear of current or

future economic losses. In Patterson, Hogan, and Willis (5), the authors provide an account of

how hoarding tendences are related to childhood deficiencies in material items caused by

poverty.

ISSUES OF VIRTUAL HOARDING AND WORKPLACE REDESIGN

The“virtual hoarder” is a relatively new aspect of hoarding behaviour and its relation to
physical hoarding is uncertain.

i Virtual hoarding has some correlation to physical hoarding in terms of organization and

stewardship practices: many individuals are effectively misplacing or damaging digital files

through not providing sufficient tags and by not updating files from out-of-date formats

(Gormley and Gormley 22). This behavior can result in losses to organizations that are

comparable to those of physical resource losses as information needed for organizational

operations is taken out of circulation (“Is It Workplace Hoarding?” 3). Virtual items that are

hoarded have evolved from simple e-mail address rosters to collections of highly detailed

avatars and complex online game strategies (Ng and Höpfl 751; Oravec Virtual 47). Kirk and

Sellen, as well as Good, have categorized an assortment of the personal media archives that are

often collected and maintained by individuals and households, assemblages that include digital

images associated with vacations and other family events. In terms of its immediate physical

footprint, however, the collection of digital books that can be stored on even a modest computer

system is tiny in relation to a comparable assortment of physical, pulp-based books. While

physical workplace and community hoardings can provide substantial safety and public health

issues, the accumulation of virtual goods has fairly little physical impact. Moreover, the

hoarding of virtual items has not yet been shown to be a direct substitute (or object of

transference) for the hoarding of physical items; some hoarders of physical goods are not

hoarders of virtual goods, and vice versa (Fried).

Oravec

Identifying individuals who violate workplace sharing norms in physical or virtual

realms as “hoarders” can serve to identify and possibly isolate them. As the hoarding persona

moves to the foreground, other personas of these individuals that could make them appear as

valuable to the organization can be diminished. Gormley and Gormley discuss how data

hoarding is manifested in employee behavior, stating that “hoarding data can create a false

sense of uncertainty avoidance” (90). As individuals accumulate organizational information, but

do not process and share it, they remove certain information resources out of the hands of

colleagues in strategic ways (Evans, Hendron, and Oldroyd 494). The possibility that certain

individuals would take it upon themselves to collect and store workplace-owned digital

resources that are not made available to other organizational members could be seen as parallel

to the concerns of many employers about the hoarding of physical goods. The model of the

employee as existing as part of a system controlled by others in the organization, and not as an

autonomous entity, reflects persistent workplace conflicts between the individual and the

collective.

Hoarders of virtual goods may be unable to decipher the accepted organizational
standards concerning the organization and storage of digital entities, or have increased

anxieties linked to the standards’ complexities or contradictions. Some organizations do not

have clear distinctions between what is retained because of organizational needs and what is

indeed “hoarded” ("Is It Workplace Hoarding?" 3). Managerial determinations here are often

based on perceived institutional needs but can have considerable personal impacts as they

affect how managers and co-workers deal with the behavior of individuals. For example, virtual

files retained over time need to be managed by employees: changes in file formats through the

years can make archived documents either useless or very costly to decipher. The orderliness of

the physical and virtual assets of organizations often increases their perceived value by

managers (Kim 496), so hoarding behavior related to the organization’s virtual and physical

goods can have economic dimensions and thus attract more of the attention of managers. Legal

issues can arise as documents relating to product defects or other unfortunate workplace

matters are buried in the files of employees or as copyright infringement issues emerge. In the

workplace, the hoarding of pornographic images in organization-owned computers and online

networks has also become a problem, one that is especially curious because of the fact that the

individuals involved could readily download and store the materials on their own digital devices

rather than endanger their careers by using organizational resources (Oravec “Ethics” 137).

When employees use the computer equipment provided in their workplace for such activity

(rather than their own smartphone or computer tablet), it may reveal a great deal about the

individuals’ judgment. Aggressive managerial efforts to detect and diagnose hoarding behavior

in the virtual realm either for economic or legal purposes could increase the surveillance of

employees and magnify workplace privacy issues, which are already substantial concerns in

many organizational contexts (Sprague 83).

SOME CONCLUSIONS AND REFLECTIONS

Research on the persona of the hoarder in workplace contexts is just beginning and

researchers are unclear as to its dimensions, especially in virtual realms. For individuals whose

hoarding behavior has some linkages to concerns about memory losses, the digital recording of

everyday events may eventually provide some relief and perhaps serve to reframe hoarding

behaviors. Some individuals are already engaged in experiments in which their entire lives are

being taped (“lifelogging”) so that any slippage in memory could be compensated (Lupton 77;

Wolf et al. 8). As proposed by Baraniuk and others, missing items could be replaced through 3-

D printing on demand (46). Perhaps these dramatic ways of supplementing and even enhancing

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

individuals’ memories and memorabilia may eventually serve to alter some of the dysfunctional

patterns that lead to hoarding. However, lifelogging practices could also engender new forms of

dysfunction as individuals are called upon to be responsible for more (real or virtual) artifacts,

narratives, and memories. Workplace demands for detailed decision-making on the disposition

of countless physical as well as virtual items could increase with the enhanced capabilities for

detailed recall that lifelogging provides.

Providing basic support and empowerment for all individuals in organizations is part of

establishing a just society (Campbell and Oliver 125). Designing workplace environments in

which the management of organizational resources and personal possessions can be performed

in a more humane, less stressful, and less time-consuming manner can aid organizations as well

as individuals. Rather than framing individuals as “hoarders” (which has overwhelming

negative implications), employers can enable employees to deal with problems in terms of

organization and retention of physical and virtual items. Sets of clearly-stated policies

concerning how much and what kinds of personalization of the workplace is acceptable may be

helpful (Brandes and Erlhoff 16), relieving the stress of interpreting complex and changing

workplace standards. These environmental and social accommodations would probably also lift

the decision-making burdens of many individuals in the workplace, not just those who are

labeled as “hoarders.” After such changes, the persona of the hoarder might still be one of many

that are associated with an individual, but its implications could be less severe and its

placement less in the foreground.

For individuals who are currently or will soon be participating in organizational

decision making, becoming aware of hoarding behavior issues can help to catalyze positive

change. Discussing hoarding in workplace contexts may help employees and management

become sensitive to the situations of the individuals involved and, perhaps, displace the hoarder

persona from its prominent (and frequently dominant) position. The opportunistic use of

images of hoardings by organizations to individuate and control individuals (despite the pain

these efforts may cause the individuals involved), also raises issues about autonomy, respect,

privacy, and human rights. In dealing with hoarding issues, it is important to remember that

human beings with feelings and needs are involved. The shame associated with hoarding can

be painful and may certainly be reinforced by the use of insensitive approaches. As “Mad Pride,”

disability acceptance, and comparable initiatives clear a path for the expression of the voices of

those who are associated with varied psychological conditions, there indeed may be hope for

those whose lives are somehow linked with hoarding (see Campbell and Oliver 62). Instead of

placing the onus primarily on individuals to deal with hoarding behavior, organizations and
communities can work to provide accommodations, possibly by moderating their considerable

demands on individuals in terms of the management and storage of possessions. Understanding

and acceptance on the part of all involved, along with the generation and analyses of creative

approaches, may go a substantial distance toward mitigating these concerns.

END NOTES

i It bears pointing out that the computer equipment that is utilized by hoarders for the

collection of these virtual items raises another workplace issue: the often horrifying working
conditions of those who manufacture these technologies (Mayer 19).

Oravec

WORKS CITED

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed.
Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association, 2013. Print.

Ayers, Catherine R., Princeton Ly, Ian Howard, Tina Mayes, Ben Porter, and Yasmeen Iqbal.
“Hoarding Severity Predicts Functional Disability in Latelife Hoarding Disorder
Patients.” International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 29.7 (2014): 741-746. Print.

Baraniuk, Chris. “Things to Come.” New Scientist 221.2962 (2014): 46-47. Print.
Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, John F. Sherry, and Morris B. Holbrook. “Collecting in a

Consumer Culture.” Highways and Buyways: Naturalistic Research from the Consumer
Behavior Odyssey. (1991): 178-215. Print.

Bergstrom, Theodore C. “On the Evolution of Hoarding, Risk-taking, and Wealth Distribution in
Nonhuman and Human Populations.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 111.Supplement 3 (2014): 10860-10867. Print.

Brandes, Uta, and Michael Erlhoff, eds. My Desk is My Castle: Exploring Personalization Cultures.
Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2012. Print.

Bratiotis, Christiana. Task Force Community Response to Compulsive Hoarding Cases. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Boston University, 3363599 (2009). Print.

Bratiotis, Christiana, Cristina Sorrentino Schmalisch, and Gail Steketee. The Hoarding Handbook:
A Guide for Human Service Professionals. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.

Breininger, Dorothy. Stuff Your Face Or Face Your Stuff: The Organized Approach to Lose Weight
by Decluttering Your Life. Deerfield Beach, Florida: Health Communications, Inc. (HCI).
2013. Print.

Broady, Timothy R. “The Carer Persona: Masking Individual Identities.” Persona Studies 1.1
(2015): 65-75. Print.

Bubrick, Jerome, Fugen Neziroglu, and Jose Yaryura-Tobias. Overcoming Compulsive Hoarding:
Why You Save and How You Can Stop. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, 2004.
Print.

Campbell, Jane, and Mike Oliver. Disability Politics: Understanding Our Past, Changing Our Future.
New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.

Canale, Anthony, and Bradley Klontz. “Hoarding Disorder: It’s More Than Just an Obsession-
Implications for Financial Therapists and Planners.” Journal of Financial Therapy 4.2
(2013): 43-63. Print.

Coles, Meredith E., Randy O. Frost, Richard G. Heimberg, and Gail Steketee. “Hoarding Behaviors
in a Large College Sample.” Behaviour Research and Therapy 41.2 (2003): 179-194.
Print.

Conniff, Richard. “The Hoarding Instinct.” Smithsonian 42.9 (2012): 92. Print.
de la Cruz, Lorena Fernández, Ashley E. Nordsletten, Danielle Billotti, and David Mataix-Cols.

“Photograph-aided Assessment of Clutter in Hoarding Disorder: Is a Picture Worth a
Thousand Words?” Depression and Anxiety 30.1 (2013): 61-66. Print.

Diekema, Anne R., and M. Whitney Olsen. “Teacher Personal Information Management (PIM)
Practices: Finding, Keeping, and ReFinding Information.” Journal of the Association for
Information Science and Technology 65.11 (2014): 2261-2277. Print.

Edwards, Richard C., and Richard Edwards. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the
Workplace in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books, 1979. Print.

Ellis, Lindsay. “An Adjunct’s Death Becomes a Rallying Cry for Many in Academe.” Chronicle of
Higher Education. Chronicle. 19 Sept. 2013. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.

Elsbach, Kimberly D. “Interpreting Workplace Identities: The Role of Office Décor.” Journal of
Organizational Behavior 25.1 (2004): 99-128. Print.

Evans, Joel M., Michael G. Hendron, and James B. Oldroyd. “Withholding the Ace: The Individual-
and Unit-Level Performance Effects of Self-Reported and Perceived Knowledge
Hoarding.” Organization Science 26.2 (2014): 494-510. Print.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00057967

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

Fitzgerald, Paul B. “The ‘Bowerbird Symptom': A Case of Severe Hoarding of Possessions.”
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 31.4 (1997): 597-600. Print.

Foster, Gwendolyn Audrey. Hoarders, Doomsday Preppers, and the Culture of Apocalypse. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Print.

Fried, Daniel. “Compulsive Hoarding: Psychopathologies of Print, Phenomenologies of Text.”
Culture, Theory, and Critique 55.3 (2014). Print.

Frost, Randy O., Gail Steketee, and Lauren Williams. “Compulsive Buying, Compulsive Hoarding,
and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.” Behavior Therapy 33.2 (2002): 201–214. Print.

Good, Katie Day. “From Scrapbook to Facebook: A History of Personal Media Assemblage and
Archives.” New Media & Society 15.4 (2013): 557-573. Print.

Gormley, Cynthia J., and Samantha J. Gormley. “Data Hoarding and Information Clutter: The
Impact on Cost, Life Span of Data, Effectiveness, Sharing, Productivity, and Knowledge
Management Culture.” Issues in Information Systems 13.2 (2012): 90-95. Print.

Grisham, Jessica, Gail Steketee, and Randy O. Frost. “Interpersonal Problems and Emotional
Intelligence in Compulsive Hoarding.” Depression and Anxiety 25.9 (2008): E63-E81.
Print.

Haiken, Melanie. “The Surprising New Truth About Hoarding Disorder” Forbes. Forbes, 19 Nov.
2013. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.

Haugen, David, and Susan Musser. Should the U.S. Reduce Its Consumption? Farmington Hills:
Greenhaven Press, 2011. Print.

Herring, Scott. “Collyer Curiosa: A Brief History of Hoarding.” Criticism, 53.2 (2011): 159-188.
Print.

---. The Hoarders: Material Deviance in Modern American Culture. U of Chicago P, 2014. Print.
Hudson, Wayne C. “Persona and Defence Mechanisms.” Journal of Analytical Psychology 23.1

(1978): 54-62. Print.
“Is It Workplace Hoarding ... Or Record-Keeping?” Administrative Professional Today 40.3

(2014): 3. Print.
Jones, Colin, and Satwant Singh. “The Experience of Emotional Distancing in the Management of

Compulsive Hoarding: A Visual Methods Approach Using The ‘Hoard’ Acronym Tool.”
Journal of Cognitive-Behavioral Psychotherapy and Research 2.1 (2013): 41-46. Print.

Kibby, Marjorie. “Collect Yourself: Negotiating Personal Music Archives.” Information,
Communication & Society 12.3 (2009): 428-443. Print.

Kim, Seok Eun. “Physical Workplace as a Strategic Asset for Improving Performance in Public
Organizations.” Administration & Society 46.5 (2014): 496-518. Print.

Kirk, David S., and Abigail Sellen. “On Human Remains: Values and Practice in the Home
Archiving of Cherished Objects.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
(TOCHI) 17.3 (2010): 10. Print.

Lawrence, Lee Matthew, Joseph Ciorciari, and Michael Kyrios. “Relationships that Compulsive
Buying Has with Addiction, Obsessive-compulsiveness, Hoarding, and Depression.”
Comprehensive Psychiatry 55.5 (2014): 1137-1145. Print.

Leonard, Annie. The Story of Stuff: How Our Obsession with Stuff Is Trashing the Planet, Our
Communities, and Our Health-and a Vision for Change. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010.
Print.

Lepselter, Susan. “The Disorder of Things: Hoarding Narratives in Popular Media.”
Anthropological Quarterly 84.4 (2011): 919-947. Print.

Lupton, Deborah. “Self-tracking Cultures: Towards a Sociology of Personal Informatics.”
Proceedings of the 26th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference on Designing
Futures: the Future of Design. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) (2014): 77-
86. Print.

Magallares, Alejandro, Jose Morales, and Miguel Rubio. “The Effect of Work Discrimination on
the Well-being of Obese People.” International Journal of Psychology & Psychological
Therapy 11.2 (2011): 255-267. Print.

Mataix-Cols, David. “Hoarding Disorder.” New England Journal of Medicine 370.21 (2014): 2023-
30. Print.

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/viewarticle?data=dGJyMPPp44rp2%2fdV0%2bnjisfk5Ie46%2fWP5t%2fyRuvX54as2%2baH8eq%2bSq2urUqup7A4tLCxSLiqsTjOw6SM8Nfsi9%2fZ8oHt5Od8u6O2S7Oosk%2bxqbE%2b6tfsf7vb7D7i2Lt5t96kjN%2fdu1nMnN%2bGu6y1SLSrtE2xnOSH8OPfjLvc84Tq6uOQ8gAA&hid=19
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/viewarticle?data=dGJyMPPp44rp2%2fdV0%2bnjisfk5Ie46%2fWP5t%2fyRuvX54as2%2baH8eq%2bSq2urUqup7A4tLCxSLiqsTjOw6SM8Nfsi9%2fZ8oHt5Od8u6O2S7Oosk%2bxqbE%2b6tfsf7vb7D7i2Lt5t96kjN%2fdu1nMnN%2bGu6y1SLSrtE2xnOSH8OPfjLvc84Tq6uOQ8gAA&hid=19

Oravec

Mayer, Vicki. Below the Line: Producers and Production Studies in the New Television Economy.
Durham: Duke UP, 2011. Print.

Mueller, Astrid, Ross D. Crosby, Heide Glaesmer, and Martina de Zwaan. “The Prevalence of
Compulsive Hoarding and its Association with Compulsive Buying in a German
Population-based Sample.” Behaviour Research and Therapy 47.8 (2009): 705-709.
Print.

Murphy, Kathryn. “The High Cost of Hoarding Disorder.” Nursing Management 45.6 (2014): 20-
26. Print.

Neal-Barnett, Angela, and Lorre Mendelson. “Obsessive Compulsive Disorder in the Workplace:
An Invisible Disability.” Women & Therapy 26.1/2 (2003): 169. Print.

Ng, Ricky Yuk-kwan, and Heather Höpfl. “Objects in Exile: The Intimate Structures of Resistance
and Consolation.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 24.6 (2011): 751-766.
Print.

O’Connor, John. “To Hold On or to Let Go? Loss and Substitution in the Process of
Hoarding.” European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling 16.2 (2014): 101-113. Print.

Oravec, Jo Ann. Virtual Individuals, Virtual Groups: Human Dimensions of Groupware and
Computer Networking. New York: Cambridge UP, 1996. Print.

---. “The Ethics of Sexting: Issues Involving Consent and the Production of Intimate Content.”
Digital Ethics. Eds. Don Heider and Adrienne L. Massanari. New York: Peter Lang, 2012.
129-145. Print.

Paterson, Jennifer, Jessica Hogan, and Heather Willis.“Vision, Passion, Action: Reflections on
Learning to Do Disability Studies in the Classroom and Beyond.” Disability Studies
Quarterly 28.4 (2008): 1-11. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.

Pearce, Susan. Collecting in Contemporary Practice. New York: Sage, 1997.
Pertusa, Alberto, Randy O. Frost, Miguel A. Fullana, Jack Samuels, Gail Steketee, David Tolin,

Sanjaya Saxena, James F. Leckman, and David Mataix-Cols. “Refining the Diagnostic
Boundaries of Compulsive Hoarding: A Critical Review.” Clinical Psychology Review 30.4
(2010): 371-386. Print.

Rasmussen, Jessica, Gail Steketee, Michelle Silverman, and Sabine Wilhelm. “The Relationship of
Hoarding Symptoms to Schizotypal Personality and Cognitive Schemas in an OCD
Sample.” Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy 27.4(2013): 384-396. Print.

Rasmussen, R. Kent. Dear Mark Twain: Letters from his readers. U of California P, 2014. Print.
Ronan, Keith P. “Navigating the Goat Paths: Compulsive Hoarding, or Collyer Brothers

Syndrome, and the Legal Reality of Clutter.” Rutgers Law Review 64 (2011): 235-264.
Print.

Russell, Bertrand. Principles of Social Reconstruction. New York: Routledge. 1917/1997. Print.
Santuzzi, Alecia M., Pamela R. Waltz, Lisa M. Finkelstein, and Deborah E. Rupp. “Invisible

Disabilities: Unique Challenges for Employees and Organizations.” Industrial and
Organizational Psychology 7.2 (2014): 204-219. Print.

Sholl, Jessie. Dirty Secret: A Daughter Comes Clean about her Mother’s Hoarding. Gallery Books,
2010. Print.

Shulman, Terrence. Cluttered Lives, Empty Souls: Compulsive Stealing, Spending, and Hoarding.
San Carlos: Infinity, 2011. Print.

Solnit, Rebecca. A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that Arise in Disaster.
New York: Penguin, 2010. Print.

Sprague, Robert. “Orwell was an Optimist: the Evolution of Privacy in the United States and its
De-evolution for American Employees.” John Marshall Law Review 42 (2008): 83-134.
Print.

Steketee, Gail, and Randy Frost. Stuff: Compulsive Hoarding and the Meaning of Things. New
York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2010. Print.

Thomas, J. A., and K. Mora. “Community Resilience, Latent Resources and Resource Scarcity after
an Earthquake: Is Society Really Three Meals Away from Anarchy?” Natural
Hazards 74.2 (2014): 1-14. Print.

Thoreau, Henry D. Walden. New York: Dover Thrift Editions, 1845/1995. Print.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796709001065
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796709001065
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796709001065

Persona Studies 2015, 1.2

Tolin, David F., Randy O. Frost, and Gail Steketee. “A Brief Interview for Assessing Compulsive
Hoarding: The Hoarding Rating Scale-Interview.” Psychiatry Research 178.1 (2010): 147-
152. Print.

Tolin, David F., Randy O. Frost, Gail Steketee, Krista D. Gray, and Kristin E. Fitch. “The Economic
and Social Burden of Compulsive Hoarding.” Psychiatry Research 160.2 (2008): 200-211.
Print.

Vigne, Paula, Gabriela B. de Menezes, Murat Yucel, and Leonardo F. Fontenelle. “Can Hoarding
be a Symptom of Social Anxiety Disorder? A Case Study.” The International Journal of
Psychiatry in Medicine 46.3 (2013): 315-23. Print.

Wang, John M., Rachael D. Seidler, Julie L. Hall, and Stephanie D. Preston. “The Neural Bases Of
Acquisitiveness: Decisions To Acquire And Discard Everyday Goods Differ Across
Frames, Items, And Individuals.” Neuropsychologia 50.5 (2012): 939-948. Print.

Weinman, Jaime J. “Can't Get Enough Of Compulsive Hoarders.” Maclean's 124.1 (2011): 77.
Print.

Weiss, Kenneth J. “Hoarding, Hermitage, and the Law: Why We Love the Collyer Brothers.”
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 38.2 (2010): 251-257. Print.

Winter, Izabelle. Diary of a Hoarder's Daughter. Amazon Digital Services, 2014. Print.
Wolf, Katrin, Albrecht Schmidt, Agon Bexheti, and Marc Langheinrich. “Lifelogging: You're

Wearing a Camera?” IEEE Pervasive Computing 13.3 (2014): 8-12. Print.
Woody, Sheila R., Kirstie Kellman-McFarlane, and Alison Welsted. “Review of Cognitive

Performance in Hoarding Disorder.” Clinical Psychology Review 34.4 (2014): 324-336.
Print.

Zamwel, Einat, Orna Sasson-Levy, and Guy Ben-Porat. “Voluntary Simplifiers as Political
Consumers: Individuals Practicing Politics through Reduced Consumption.” Journal of
Consumer Culture 14.2 (2014): 199-217. Print.

Jo Ann Oravec is a professor of information technology in the College of Business and

Economics at the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater. She has chaired the Privacy Council of

the State of Wisconsin and has written extensively on privacy, American studies, artificial

intelligence, futurism, online reputational systems, and emerging technologies.

http://www.psy-journal.com/issues?issue_key=S0165-1781(10)X0006-3
http://www.amazon.com/Izabelle-Winter/e/B00KE2IR40/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1