EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 9, No. 2 The Place of Spirituality in Organizational Theory By: Arnaldo Oliveira Introduction addition, their research indicated that [email protected] employees expect organizations to cul- The term spirituality infers a number tivate some type of spirituality within Abstract of conclusions and may firmly imply some their members in order to produce high Spirituality in the American work- form of religious connotation. Several quality products and services. However, authors have offered a variety of defini- taking a different direction, Mohamed et place has been receiving increasing tions of spirituality: Some with atheistic al. claimed that the attempt to differenti- attention by the popular literature. and materialistic constructions (Deh- ate between spirituality and religiosity is However, the issue has received ler & Welsh, 1994; Mitroff & Denton, merely artificial. As an alternative to this little consideration from manage- 1999a; Ashmos & Duchon, 2000), and unnecessary dichotomy, they proposed ment scholars. Although there are others with pantheistic and deistic vi- that the concept of spirituality should several definitions of spirituality, sions (Benner, 1989; Mohamed, Hassan be added to the five-factor psychological & Wisnieski, 2001). To Griffin (1988), model of personality, the “Big Five,” as its this paper discusses it as a cultural for example, spirituality is an inherent sixth dimension. Their justification, nev- phenomenon that might influ- human characteristic that does not in- ertheless, attempted to find support in ence organizational behavior. The trinsically infer any religious meaning: the facts that the concept of spirituality investigation of spirituality in the Spirituality in this broad sense is not is not in opposition to other well-estab- workplace demands the examination an optional quality which we might elect lished psychological constructs and that of organization theory and some of not to have. Everyone embodies a [sic] the Big Five has already been linked to spirituality, even if it be a nihilistic or ma- job performance. Mohamed et al. also its concepts. Open systems, institu- terialistic spirituality. It is also, of course, speculated that spirituality, manage- tional isomorphism, open fields, in- customary to use spirituality in a stricter rial behavior and, job performance are, stitutionalism, and neo-institutional sense for a way of life oriented around to some extent, interconnected, which theories are examined. Spirituality an ultimate meaning and around values could explain some of the variances in job should not be neglected as a legiti- other than power, pleasure, and posses- performance that have not yet been eluci- mate organizational topic of study, sion. (pp. 1-2) dated by the Big Five. According to Mitroff and Denton, Although the literature has provided and more research on the impact of (1999a), spirituality is “the basic feeling of ample interpretations for spirituality, the spirituality in the workplace should being connected with one’s complete self, definition used in this article, in a broad be conducted. others, and the entire universe” (p.86). sense, refers to people’s values and mean- Dehler and Welsh (1994) defined spir- ings, which sometimes might incorporate ituality as “a specific form of work feeling religious beliefs as well. Further, this that energizes action” (p. 19). Ashmos premise also infers that spirituality might and Duchon (2000) discussed spirituali- carry strong cultural connotations. ty in the context of community work, and Benner (1989) believed that spirituality involves the process of establishing and Discussion maintaining a relationship with God. Mohamed, Hassan, and Wisnieski A New Paradigm (2001), highlighted the fact that several In recent years, the place of spiritual- scholars (Harlos, 2000; Shafranske & ity in organizations has been increasingly Malony, 1990) defended the importance considered by (a) managers, (b) execu- of defining the conceptual differences be- tives, (c) employees, and (d) research- tween spirituality and religiosity. Thus, ers to be essential to the organization's in their view, spirituality may be personal, interactions with employees, customers, inclusive, and positive, whereas religiosity and the community (Ashmos & Duchon, might be external, exclusive, and nega- 2000; Conger, 1994; Dehler & Welsh, tive. Supporting the recommendation of 1994; Hansen, 2001). However, little Mahamed et al., in a two-year empirical attention has been paid in the literature study based on both face-to-face inter- to the investigation of spirituality as a views and survey questionnaires, Mitroff cultural phenomenon that might influ- and Denton (1999b) found that 60 per- ence organizational behavior and induce cent of the participants viewed religion organizational change. Therefore, few as an inappropriate form of expression, change models that embraced some sort whereas spirituality was interpreted as of spiritual element (Senge, 1990; Covey, a proper subject for the workplace. In 1989) became an alternative. 17 http://ejbo.jyu.fi/ EJBO Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies Vol. 9, No. 2 A number of studies (Graber & Johnson, 2001; Griffin, theories, developed mostly by academics and popularized by 1988; Hall, 1996; Hansen, 2001; Rifkin, 1995) indicated that consultants and gurus, and the actions of practicing managers. changes in individuals, demographics, and organizations rep- This is important because on it rests vital issues of management resent the major influencing forces forging a new workplace education and learning, and even more importantly, the basis paradigm, which demands more integrative approaches to life on which business is conducted. Yet, the relationship between and work. Founded on these change phenomena, Rifkin (1995) organizational theory and the practice of managers and other concluded that societies must devise a new labor contract fea- organizational participants has remained one of the most elu- turing shorter workweeks, so people could dedicate more time sive and recalcitrant. (p. 134) to other parts of their life and place more value in the time al- Organizational theory. Several studies (DiMaggio & located to volunteer and community work. Powell 1991; DiMaggio, 1998; Olivier, 1991) focused on how Hall (1996) predicted drastic changes in the organizations organizations influence their environments and how organiza- of the 21st century. He speculated that individuals rather than tions actively contribute to the social construction of these en- organizations would control careers and that success would be vironments. As a result, the process by which organizational measured in terms of psychological fulfillment rather than fi- environments are constituted, reproduced, and transformed has nancial accomplishment. In addition, he suggested that both become a relevant issue for management research. managers and employees should start facilitating the transition The open systems views of organizations. Organizations to this new paradigm by putting more meaning on relationships function like living organisms and prosper when all their sub- in the workplace. systems support their strategic designs. Therefore, a major role Besides the gradual importance on personal satisfaction for the leadership of these organizations is to align, or realign, highlighted by Hall, other relevant factors may also impose new strategy with the demands of their surrounding environments challenges to the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. For ex- (Overholt, Connally, Harrington, & Lopez, 2000). In other ample, the demographic changes that have been occurring in the words, the open systems approach views organizations receiv- United States for the last decades and, in particular, the rise of an ing inputs from their environments, and in turn, affecting those ethnically diverse workforce might have influenced the reshap- environments by the transformed outputs that are the organiza- ing of relationships in various organizational levels. According tional products. The open systems theory is based on “the idea to Hansen (2001), a number of conditions have contributed to that the whole of a system is more important than the sum of accentuate the human needs and desires for relationships, bal- its parts” (Senge et al., 1999, p.138). According to Overholt et ance, and community concern, which also have led to a shift- al. (2000), the open systems theory possesses four basic princi- ing on the emphasis from a dominating market standpoint to ples: a more human-needs approach. As a result, some corporations 1. Organizations are living systems that are ever-changing have paid more attention to the needs of certain groups of em- and adapting to their external environment ployees for benefits such as childcare, long-term care, and well- 2. Organizations are dynamic internally, with all subsystems ness programs. anticipating, responding, or reacting to changes within the or- According to Palmer (2001), spirituality at the workplace ganization has been trending up. To highlight his viewpoint, he mentioned 3. Organizations organize around their corporate survival that large corporations such as Intel, Wal-Mart, Xerox, Ford, strategy, exploiting and filling niches in the markets Nike, and Harley-Davidson have supported spirituality in their 4. Organizations must be internally congruent or consistent work environments. Organizations could become more suc- to maximize efficiency