Response to Research from Peer (Spirituality in the Workplace)
John Isaacson
March 26, 2017
BMAL 560
The discussion around spirituality in the workplace raises a number of interesting topics. Should the expression of spirituality be allowed at all? If not, what is the alternative? Is there such a thing as neutrality? How should managers deal with the inappropriate expression of spirituality? Has the recent EU decision to allow the banning of Muslim headscarves violated wisdom and virtue (Macdonald, 2017)? These are only a small number of the questions that can be raised regarding this issue.
As a Christian, I believe a good starting point would be the Golden Rule of doing to others what I would have them to do to me (Matthew 7:12, Holy Bible). Personal spirituality programs, if done at all, should be promoted for every expression of spirituality. To allow the suppression of one is not only discriminatory, but it is also the path to the discrimination of others or all. For this reason, the Christian should be happy to see the promotion of other groups as it is a protection for all groups.
As an American citizen, I believe the First Amendment of the Constitution should inform our decisions regarding the free expression of spirituality in the workplace. While private companies should have the freedom to champion one view over another, wisdom recognizes the diversity of views in a workplace. The First Amendment informs the minds of free people with regard to religious tolerance and should encourage people to express personal spirituality in a manner that doesn’t constitute the harassment of others.
The text points out that “as far back as 1976, scholars have found a positive relationship between an organization’s economic performance and attention to spiritual values” (Lawrence & Weber, 2017). Humans are spiritual in their identity, so allowing them to express their identity creates a greater workplace satisfaction and therefore productivity. As an article from Human Resource Management International Digest states, “Thus while the financial benefits derived from work are important in securing individuals’ endeavors, the meaningfulness of work will also depend on its degree of congruence with…its capacity to engender and sustain positive (and spiritual) identities which people are free to enact” (Freeman, Kunter, Douglas & Roper, 2015).
Conversely, a company who claims to prize diversity becomes a “vision killer” when there is an undue suppression of spiritual expression. This, as Khalib Fischer points out, is when a behavior (e.g., the suppression of spirituality) kills vision and creates cynicism (Fischer, n.d.). Even elements of the Chinese government, which in the past 60 years has rarely been thought of a religiously tolerant, are promoting the value of embracing spirituality in the workplace, starting at the level of human resource management (Wang & Han, 2016).
In conclusion, the expression of spirituality in the workplace should be promoted for all if it is promoted for any. To not promote spirituality in the workplace is to run the risk of demoralizing the workforce (internally) and killing the vision of the company (externally). While there are challenges to balancing the proper reaches of spirituality in the workplace, the positives of allowing spiritual expression far outweigh the negatives of managing the misuse.
References
