Critical Psychology in Changing World 672 Outlining Critical Psychology of Work in Latin America Hernán Camilo Pulido Martínez Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Abstract This paper outlines some of the approaches that are constructing a critical psychology of work, in, for and from Latin America. These approaches reveal that there is not just one body of knowledge in the region; on the contrary, there are multiple conceptual frameworks and tools used to consider the local-global world of work. This wide range of possibilities indicates the variety of appropriations, and hybridisations of knowledge which are available in Latin America for researching, teaching and intervention in critical psychology of work. The non-exhaustive examination of some of the main trends in academic production serves as an invitation for those interested in furthering these perspectives. The studies that were examined can be grouped in three categories. The first group of studies, in varied ways, points to geopolitics of knowledge about psychological objects. The second group considers the problems of importation of psycho-technology to be applied in working conditions for which they were not specifically designed, and the last group brings the category “work” to the centre of analysis. Keywords: Work: Critical psychology of work, Geopolitics of psychology, Critical Psychology, Work psychology. Introduction It is well known that psychology found a way for its expansion around the world by its applications to work environments. It is an undeniable fact that the transplantation of psychological jargons and strategies represented a ‘silk road’ for the international dissemination of psychology in many countries (Blowers & Turtle, 1987). The expansion of psychology in countries where this knowledge is not produced but merely applied is much celebrated by some local psychologists who ‘praise’ the outcomes of its application. These celebrations very often bring about mimetic processes in which the replica of psychology is translated as the ‘best way’ for the administration of business. That is to say, the application of psychology in an acritical way implies modernization, well-being and progress (Pulido- Martinez, 2008). As pointed out by González-Rey (2004), this rationale is typical of a colonized way of thinking. It allows psychologists to be satisfied with being loyal followers of established psychological tendencies, rather than being producers of their own psychological thought. Consequently, in Latin America it is easy to find that being a politically correct psychologist is often associated with replication of psychological precepts, observation of disciplinary boundaries, and disapproval of any critical and autochthonous ways of thinking and solving problems. So, psychologists’ identities are linked to foreign traditions whereby they are more concerned with the presupposed efficiency that their interventions may bring about than with an open debate as regards the political implications of their actions. This situation, when considered in the light of geopolitics of psychology (Molinari, 2004), implies that Latin America until recently has been no more than a terrain to be conquered by