"It is important to emphasise that such groups ultimately lock in wealth, advantage and connections between their (predominantly male) class-advantaged members."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....

Thank you @jheathershaw.bsky.social!

It’s been a long journey from submission to publication. Huge thanks to all who read, reviewed and discussed along the way 🙏

Membership is often justified with the phrase “it’s lonely at the top.” Yet in creating exclusive spaces as a solution to that isolation, these groups only serve to reinforce separation from wider society.

I highlight 3 key social processes:
• Homophily – preference for similarity
• Structured reciprocity – rules ensuring mutual benefit and removing rivalry
• Therapeutic cultural resources – practices that encourage members to be open and vulnerable

I also explore when membership fails to appeal.

Drawing on 41 interviews with the wealthy (21 of whom were members of a CEO peer advisory group), I explore the therapeutic turn among C-suite executives and owners of major businesses.

The article asks: how do these groups make and legitimate cohesion among elites?

Tracing the roots of these groups led me to some unexpected places, including counter-cultural ideas rooted in the Human Potential Movement, and more recently to the seemingly ubiquitous influence of therapy culture.

Congratulations!