The Profession Built on Goodwill
David A. Songco, PsyD
One of the paradoxes of helping professions is that the more essential the work becomes, the easier it is for that work to be taken for granted.
Psychologists understand this dynamic well. We see it in families, organizations, and therapy groups. Individuals who consistently provide emotional labor often become indispensable to the functioning of the group. They soothe conflict, facilitate communication, mentor others, and absorb distress. Their contributions are highly valued in theory yet frequently overlooked in practice.
Over time, a subtle shift occurs. What began as generosity becomes expectation. What began as going above and beyond becomes the baseline.
Groups come to depend on sacrifice.
I have been thinking about this dynamic recently as conversations about psychologist compensation continue to emerge across healthcare, academia, and organized psychology. Discussions about compensation often make psychologists uncomfortable. Many of us entered the profession because we wanted to help people. Advocacy for fair compensation can feel self-serving, inconsistent with our professional identity, or even contrary to our values.
Yet avoiding conversations about compensation does not make issues of value disappear. In fact, silence may reinforce them.
As psychologists, we routinely help organizations navigate burnout, workforce retention, moral distress, psychological safety, and systems change. We teach leaders that sustainable systems cannot rely indefinitely on the goodwill of their members. We encourage organizations to examine whether expectations placed on employees are realistic, equitable, and aligned with available resources.
Many psychologists also lead some of healthcare’s most critical workforce initiatives. We develop and support programs addressing clinician burnout, moral injury, second victim experiences, disclosure and communication following adverse events, team functioning, leadership development, and workforce well-being. We are frequently asked to help organizations understand why talented professionals leave, why teams become disengaged, and what conditions are necessary for people to thrive. Yet conversations about psychologist compensation are often treated as separate from these broader discussions of workforce sustainability. This separation is puzzling. If compensation reflects how organizations value expertise, contribution, and long-term investment in a workforce, then compensation is not merely a financial issue. It is a workforce issue. It is a retention issue. It is a sustainability issue.
Curiously, we do not always apply the same lens to our own profession.
Compensation is not simply an economic issue. It is also a reflection of value. Every compensation model communicates a set of assumptions about what work matters, what expertise is recognized, and what contributions deserve investment.
This observation is particularly relevant from a diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging perspective. Scholars have long documented the tendency for caregiving, relational, and emotional labor to be undervalued relative to procedural or technical labor (England, 2005). Work that involves relationship building, mentoring, emotional containment, conflict management, and community building is frequently essential to organizational success while remaining difficult to quantify and reimburse.
Group psychologists are intimately familiar with this reality.
Our work often occurs in spaces that are difficult to measure. We facilitate difficult conversations. We help teams recover following conflict. We create conditions for trust, cohesion, and belonging. We support leaders navigating uncertainty. We strengthen systems that would otherwise fracture under strain.
These contributions matter. Yet because they are often relational rather than procedural, they can become invisible within systems designed to reward activities that are more easily counted.
From a group relations perspective, this phenomenon should not surprise us. Bion (1961) described how groups unconsciously organize around dependency. In dependency cultures, authority figures or designated members become responsible for carrying the emotional burden of the group. The group’s functioning gradually becomes contingent upon their continued availability and willingness to absorb responsibility.
Helping professions may occupy a similar role within larger healthcare and organizational systems.
Psychologists are frequently asked to address burnout, improve communication, support workforce well being, reduce conflict, enhance patient outcomes, and strengthen organizational culture. We are asked to solve increasingly complex human problems while often operating within systems that struggle to recognize or compensate the full scope of this work.
The concern is not simply financial. The concern is systemic.
When a profession becomes defined by its willingness to sacrifice, organizations may begin to confuse dedication with inexhaustibility. The profession’s commitment becomes the justification for continually asking more of it.
This dynamic has implications for equity and belonging. Sustainable inclusion requires more than appreciation. Appreciation acknowledges contribution. Equity ensures that contribution is appropriately supported, resourced, and valued.
As psychologists, we frequently challenge organizations to examine hidden assumptions that perpetuate inequity. Perhaps it is time to ask a similar question of ourselves:
Have we become so accustomed to caring for others that we have neglected to advocate for the value of our own work?
If we believe that healthy groups require reciprocity, sustainability, and mutual investment, then that principle should apply to professions as well.
The future of psychology cannot depend solely on the willingness of psychologists to sacrifice.
At some point, care itself must be valued.
References
Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in Groups. Tavistock.
England, P. (2005). Emerging theories of care work. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 381–399.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 15(2), 103–111.
Shanafelt, T. D., West, C. P., Dyrbye, L. N., Trockel, M., Tutty, M., Wang, H., & Carlasare, L. E. (2022). Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life integration in physicians and the general US working population between 2011 and 2020. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 97(3), 491–506.