A Postmodern Spiritual Future for Work

                                           Jerry Biberman

Kania School of Management, University of Scranton, 
Scranton, PA, USA

and

Michael Whitty

College of Business, University of Detroit-Mercy, 
Birmingham, MI, USA
 

Contends that predictions of the end of work as we know it, and a bleak jobless future, as we head into the twenty-first century, derive from a modernist paradigm of work - a paradigm that has been the prevailing paradigm for the past 100 years. Seeks to provide a more hopeful and humane paradigm for the future of work - a model based on spiritual guidelines and principles. Describes characteristics of each paradigm and then contrasts them on both the individual manager and organization levels. Explores how these principles could be applied to produce power in organizational settings. 

Quality Indicators: Readability**, Practice Implications**, Originality*, Research Implications*  

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the International Academy of Business Disciplines in Orlando, Florida, April 1997. Many thanks to Krista Kepler for her assistance in preparing the article. 

Introduction 

A number of writers are predicting the end of work as we know it, and a bleak jobless future, as we head into the twenty-first century (e.g. Korten, 1995; Lerner, 1994; Rifkin, 1995). This article seeks to provide a more hopeful and humane paradigm for the future of work - a model based on spiritual guidelines and principles. In this article we will explore what these spiritual guidelines and principles might be and contrast them with the prevailing modernist paradigm. We will then explore how these principles could be applied to produce shared power in organizational settings. 

The changing nature of work 

There certainly appears to be evidence that the kinds of jobs that most employees have grown used to having for more than the past 50 years are either changing dramatically or are disappearing entirely. Employees can no longer look forward to lifetime employment with the same organization, to eight-hour work days, or to generous benefit packages. Management theorists are predicting that the workers of the future will need to demonstrate to organizations how they can add value to the organization, that workers can look forward to doing this continuously with a number of organizations over a period of less than 20 years (Bridges, 1994), and that this will require continuous skills training and re-education (Coates et al., 1990; Gordon et al., 1994). Academicians and professionals alike are noticing the increased stress and uncertainty that workers are already encountering as organizations downsize and demand ever-increasing amounts and hours of work from those workers who survive in the organization (Schor, 1993). 

Many of the organization theorists who have predicted the above occurrences also claim that the future will provide many exciting opportunities for workers who are flexible and who can demonstrate they add value to organizations (e.g. Harari, 1993). They also point to a shift in organization structure and governance from the hierarchical mechanistic monolithic organization to smaller, more organic structures consisting of empowered leaderless work teams (Coates et al. 1990; Overholt, 1996). Such organizations could provide opportunities for professional development and empowerment of workers at all levels of the organization.  

In this article, we contend that both scenarios of future work derive from a modernist paradigm of work - that has been the prevailing paradigm for the past 100 years. 

Two contrasting paradigms 

Modern paradigm 

Most organizations have been designed and managed for the past 100 years using a paradigm based largely on a logical and mechanistic paradigm - a paradigm that values reason and ãscientificä principles - that Boje and Dennehy (1994), among others, have called modernism, and that Fox (1994) has called the machine era paradigm. The paradigm assumed that people can be scientifically measured and categorized based on intellectual and other characteristics they possess, and that certain people are meant to be leaders while others are meant to be followers - or other variations of superior versus inferior - and that organizations, and indeed the whole world, run on rational laws that, once discovered, dictate the only correct way for the organization to run. This paradigm has given rise to such organization practices as scientific management, employment testing and job instructional training, and to an approach to management that this paper will call ãautocratic paternalistic stewardshipä. 

In this paradigm, rational decision making and logical thinking are encouraged, and emotions are to be avoided. Another major component of this paradigm is the belief in scarcity of resources - that is, that all resources, including financial and human resources exist in finite quantities, and possession of a resource by one person or unit implies its unavailability to other persons or units. This belief has led to such personal and organization practices as competition, political manipulation, ãpaddingä of  budget requests, empire building and lack of trust and co-operation between persons and units. In addition, this paradigm leads

to a belief that the person or organization is separate from other persons or organizations, and that preservation of the self, even if it is at the expense of the other, is paramount to survival.

Spiritual paradigm

Organizations and their executives both in Japan and in the USA are beginning to show an interest in spirituality and spiritual values (e.g. Brandt, 1996; Galen, 1995; Labbs, 1995; Vicek, 1992). A number of organizational writers are urging organizations and their members to pay more attention to spiritual values and spirituality (e.g. Bolman and Deal, 1995; Gunn, 1992; Russell, 1989; Schechter, 1995; Scherer and Shook, 1993; Walker, 1989). 

Some authors have related spirituality to organizational learning processes. Mingin (1985), for example, describes how information-based technology will lead to ãspirituality oriented fundamental abstractionsä. Vail (1985) proposes a ãprocess wisdomä explanation of organizational transformation that involves four elements - grounding in existence, appreciation of the openness of the human spirit, understanding of human consciousness, and an appreciation of the spirituality of humankind. Hawkins (1991) relates the spiritual dimension in learning organizations to Gregory Batesonâs concept of double loop Level III learning.  

Interest in organizational learning and creative thinking has also led to the increased use of certain spiritual practices - particularly meditation - among organization members, and an increased interest in intuition and whole brain thinking in organization decision processes (e.g. Agor, 1989). Increasing numbers of executives and managers are turning to various types of meditation and spiritual disciplines as a way of coping with stress and for finding meaning in their turbulent work environments (Dehler and Welsh, 1994) and in dealing with recovery from job loss (Byron, 1995).  

At the same time that organizations and managers are paying more attention to spirituality and to whole brain thinking and learning, global competition and other conditions are bringing about increased attention to team development and employee empowerment.  When one examines the various descriptions of organizations using work teams (e.g. Levine, 1994) one is struck by the similarity of the values, behaviours and processes that emerge from these teams to those described in relation to spirituality, creativity, and organization learning. Indeed, Poe (1991) points out that the Japanese, with their knowledge of Zen Buddhism, understood Demingâs Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle as a spiritual discipline. As employees master this PDSA discipline, they continually trade information with each other until individual wisdom fuses into a powerful group intelligence. Poe says that excessive reliance on logic and reason led many Westerners to misunderstand this aspect of Demingâs theories. Similarly, Fort (1995, p. 16) describes how total quality managementâs emphasis on fulfilling the needs of customers and stakeholders is a contemporary managerial articulation of what Pope John Paul calls solidarity, or the goodness of understanding the self in terms of the selfâs dialectical relationships with others. Fort asserts that ãthis expresses an overlapping wisdom that grounds a spirituality of connectedness in all aspects of life, including business.ä 

What do these emerging trends have in common? It is our contention that they represent a postmodern management paradigm that is emerging - one that emphasizes spiritual principles and practices, as opposed to the current prevailing modern management paradigm.  

Rose (1990) describes a new paradigm that is beginning to develop among managers and executives which incorporates ideas from quantum physics, cybernetics, chaos theory, cognitive science, and Eastern and Western spiritual traditions. It contains two main components - everything is seen as being interconnected, and there is a focus on empowering people. Rose attributes the vogue for Japanese management techniques, the spread of technology and the spread of idealism as fueling the trend. Fox (1994) describes many of these same characteristics as depicting what he calls the green (sheen) era of Creation as Sacrament paradigm. James Redfield (1993, 1996) has summarized many of the components into the ten insights described in the Celestine Prophecy and the Tenth Insight, and Deepak Chopra (1994) has distilled the spiritual laws involved in this paradigm (from the Indian Vedic tradition perspective) into the Seven Spiritual Laws of Success.  

It is our contention that this paradigm is continuing to emerge, and will become more widespread in future years, and that the existing stress that managers and organizations are experiencing may actually produce the catalyst for organization spiritual transformation, in ways similar to that in which personal crises have led to personal spiritual growth and transformation (Grof and Grof, 1989).  

The two paradigms contrasted

The two paradigms can be contrasted on both the individual manager and organization level. 

On an individual level, persons who ascribe to the modern management paradigm would be expected to have rigid attitudes and beliefs about the nature of themselves, other managers, their superiors and their subordinates (similar to what McGregor described as Theory X), and a set pattern of behaviours in dealing with each of them. They would also be likely to establish and follow specific procedures or rules of behaviour for themselves and others, and be resistant to change. They would attempt to base their decisions purely on logic and reason, and would frown on the use of intuition and the display of emotion. Their scarcity belief would be likely to lead to their not trusting other people, to the use of win-lose tactics in dealing with conflict situations, and to using a variety of power and political tactics to secure their own power base. They would also have a hard time delegating power to others.  

Persons operating from a spiritual paradigm perspective would be open to change, have a sense of purpose and meaning in their life, appreciate how they are connected with a greater whole, and have individual understanding and expression of their own spirituality. In contrast to a scarcity belief, they possess what has been referred to as an ãabundanceä mentality - a belief that there are abundant resources available to all, so that there is no need to compete for them. They would also be more likely to trust others, share information and work in concert with teams and co-workers to accomplish mutual objectives, and to empower their co-workers and people below them in the organization hierarchy. They would be more likely to use intuition and emotions in reaching decisions. They would also be more likely to use win-win collaborative strategies in conflict situations.  

Organizations that operate from the modern paradigm possess rigid, bureaucratic structures and hierarchical chains of command. They are more likely to use formal communication channels, have very formal policy manuals and procedures for every activity and job title in the organization. They are more concerned with following policies and procedures than in pleasing either internal or external customers. The belief in scarcity of resources leads to competition between organization units for budget, personnel, and other resources, and leads to politics and power struggles between units. 

In contrast, organizations that operate from the spiritual paradigm would be expected to have flatter organization structures and a greater openness to change. Their belief in abundant resources would lead to greater interconnectedness and co-operation between organization units, and empowerment of workers at all levels of the organization. Rather than believing in the preservation of the self at all costs, these organizations would be more concerned with existing in harmony with their environment, and would thus be more supportive of the ecology and environment, and more concerned with meeting the needs of internal and external customers. These organizations would be more likely to encourage creative thinking and the working together of organization units to establish and accomplish mutually agreed on mission statements and objectives for the organization. 

The shift to the spiritual paradigm  

It is important to point out that the characteristics we described above of persons and organizations operating from a spiritual paradigm perspective are not new. Many of the concepts advocated date back to the human relations movement of the 1950s, and organization development professors and consultants have been advocating many of these concepts for at least 40 years. What is new about these recent developments, however, is that they appear to be emerging from a different overall paradigm, and that environmental conditions are causing them to emerge much more rapidly than ever before. 

It is our contention that the human relations movement, organization development, and its attendant concepts developed as a reaction to the prevailing modernist paradigm, and existed within it, rather than trying to create a new paradigm. Thus, the proponents of the human relations movement and organization development accepted most of the underlying tenants of the modernist paradigm - such as the belief in the scientific method - as true and as fact, and then attempted to use the methods of that paradigm to call for what were largely cosmetic changes in the way organizations were managed.  

As we asserted earlier, we predict that more and more organizations and their workers can be expected to shift to this new spiritual paradigm in the coming years. This shift is not only likely to occur for the reasons Boje and Dennehy (1994) and others cite as pushing organizations into postmodern practices, but also because of the shift in the consciousness of workers and managers at all levels of organizations that is already beginning to occur as workers and managers seek to find more meaning in their work. 

Spirituality and shared power 

What the employee of the twenty-first century will need more than training is the opportunity to control more fully his or her economic destiny. This desired sense of control can only come with an expanded awareness. Part of this heightened consciousness is soulful or implicitly spiritual (Schechter, 1995). Spirit in the workplace can lead to greater kindness, fairness, even industrial democracy, also known as co-management or power sharing. An invitation to co-manage is an important step away from well-intentioned paternalism. An empowered employee increases the organizational strength and competitive energy necessary for global survival. The greatest empowerment comes from heightened consciousness of our highest self. This higher self is ultimately aware that the purpose of life and work is spiritual as well as material (Fox, 1994). The balance or integration of these two aspects will enhance the effectiveness of organizations and the people within it. This trend will expand in the century to come. Rekindling the spirit in work is not only good business but also subconsciously sought after by workers and managers alike. 

Rekindling the spirit of community in work  

Organizational soul and the spirit of the workforce have been too often ignored or neglected. Nonetheless, the history of economic reform movements and the thread of social justice in philosophy and religion have long called for a basic change of heart in human behaviour. This has always implied a more communal approach to organizational theory and practice as well as a more humanistic psychology for individual behaviour. These democratizing concepts were often introduced by social democrats in alliance with unions. Liberal religion supported these community building reforms. Spirit-based organizational theorists might profit from further interdisciplinary research into aspects of all major work reform movements of the last 200 years. With the rise of modernism came a heightened materialism that marginalized sharing and caring. Industrialism weakened community and sidelined religion. Employees were often excluded stakeholders. Now a post-industrial age yearns for community and spiritual nourishment in both personal and organizational terms. Selfishness seems dysfunctional to many global thinkers. Only by reinventing work from the inside out will individuals acquire a sense of deeper purpose in work. 

In the postmodern future, humankindâs eternal search for meaning will require not only reinventing work and the workplace but also a renewed sense of the deepest intentions behind human activity. Spirit-based organizations might also profit from such an arrangement. Co-operation may be good for peopleâs sense of shared destiny and good for the future of organizational culture. 

Shared power 

Employee ownership and community involvement in partnership with local and regional employers could evolve into an advanced form of co-management where all stakeholders shared power with spirituality forming the common ground for co-operation. The individual would be respected in a workworld that valued diversity and co-operativeness. The organization would recognize its global stewardship of all its resources. Environmental impacts for the long run would include not only the planet but also the spirit which gives it life and ultimate meaning. 

A new work community: spirit at work  

A basic workplace spirituality can be the common ground for the new work community. The philosophy of participation adopted from the team concept model can be expanded in the twenty-first century to involve human unity and higher consciousness as well as continuous improvement. This may require a fuller understanding that management makes decisions that have far-reaching impacts on the spiritual lives of employees. Work life reaches into the very soul of all working people. Employees in touch with their spirituality seek to have more input into those decisions. Rekindling the spirit in work will deepen these efforts. The final step would be a corporate attitude of servant leadership towards all stakeholders. Visionary groups such as the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership and the Noetic Sciences Institute have pathbreaking conferences and workshops designed to encourage new paradigms in business. These groups believe that shared power will insure that the future ãborderless worldä values diversity, embraces pluralism and provides global servant leadership. Workplace unity and high purpose can create a service-learning atmosphere which will result in high standards, adequate competitiveness and an agile business system for the century to come. A deepened form of organizational stewardship could evolve from reforms in organizational decision making. 

Soul at work 

Working people and human evolution itself are constantly seeking meaning, purpose and a sense of contribution to worklife. These needs are best served and deepened when a spiritual paradigm frames the intentions of all stakeholders. Real human nourishment is provided by the soulful organization.  

The postmodern work organization can transform the purpose and meaning of work without excluding employee stakeholders. During the rest of our professional lives we can teach the wisdom and skills of organizational harmony and evolving. Reframing the meaning of work has support of the servant leaders worldwide who see that a life of service best fits the basic human need for relevance, recognition, meaning and self-transcendence. The Journal of Organizational Change Management has become an academic source for new thinking on matters related to a people-centred approach to the future of work. 

References 

Agor, W.H. (1989), Intuition in Organizations, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. 

Boje, D.M. and Dennehy (1994), Managing in the Postmodern World: Americaâs Revolution against Exploitation, 2nd. ed., Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, IA.  

Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E. (1995), Leading with Soul: An Uncommon Journey of Spirit, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.  

Brandt, E. (1996), ãCorporate pioneers explore spirituality: peaceä, HRMagazine, Vol. 41 No. 4, April, pp. 82-7.  

Bridges, W. (1994), JobShift: How to Prosper in a Workplace without Jobs, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA.  

Byron, W.J. (1995), ãSpirituality on the road to re-employmentä, America, Vol. 172 No. 18, pp. 15-16.  

Chopra, D. (1994), The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success: A Practical Guide to the Fulfillment of Your Dreams, Amber-Allen Publishing, San Rafael, CA. 

Coates, J.F., Jarratt, J. and Mahaffie, J.B. (1990), Future Work: Seven Critical Forces Reshaping Work and the Workforce in North America, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. 

Dehler, G.E. And Welsh, M.A. (1994), ãSpirituality and organizational transformation: implications for the new management paradigmä, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 17-26. 

Fort, T.L. (1995), ãThe spirituality of solidarity and total quality managementä, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2, Summer, pp. 3-21. 

Fox, M. (1994), The Reinvention of Work: A New Vision of Livelihood for Our Time, Harper San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. 

Galen, M. (1995), ãCompanies hit the road less traveledä, Business Week, No. 3427, 5 June, pp. 82-4. 

Gordon, E.E., Morgen, R.R. and Ponticell, J.A. (1994), Futurework: The Revolution Reshaping American Business, Praeger, Westport, CT. 

Grof, S. and Grof, C. (Eds) (1989), Spiritual Emergency: When Personal Transformation Becomes a Crisis, Jeremy P. Tarcher, Los Angeles, CA. 

Gunn, B. (1992), ãCompetruism: ideology with a sustainable futureä, Futures, Vol. 24 No. 6, July/August, pp. 559-79. 

Harari, O. (1993), ãBack to the future of workä, Management Review, Vol. 82 No. 9, September, pp. 33-5. 

Hawkins, P. (1991), ãThe spiritual dimension of the learning organizationä, Management Education and Development, Vol. 22 No. 3, Autumn, pp. 172-87. 

Korten, D. C. (1995), When Corporations Rule the World, Kumarian Press, Inc., West Hartford, CT, and Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, CA. 

Labbs, J.J. (1995), ãBalancing spirituality and workä, Personnel Journal, Vol. 74 No. 9, September, pp. 60-76. 

Lerner, S. (1994), ãThe future of work in America: good jobs, bad jobs, beyond jobsä, Futures, Vol. 26 No. 2 , March, pp. 185-96. 

Levine, L. (1994), ãListening with spirit and the art of team dialogueä, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 61-73. 

Mingin, W. (1985), ãThe trend toward being: whatâs after the information age?ä, ReVISION, Vol. 7 No. 2, Winter-Spring, pp. 64-7. 

Overholt, M.H. (1996), Building Flexible Organizations: A People-Centered Approach, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA. 

Poe, R. (1991), ãThe new disciplineä, Success, Vol. 38 No. 6, August, p. 80. 

Redfield, J. (1993), The Celestine Prophecy: An Adventure, Warner Books, New York, NY. 

Redfield, J. (1996), The Tenth Insight: Holding the Vision, Warner Books, New York, NY. 

Rifkin, J. (1995), The End of Work, G.P. Putnam and Sons, New York, NY. 

Rose, F. (1990), ãA new age for business?ä, Fortune, Vol. 122 No. 9, 8 October, pp. 156-64. 

Russell, P. (1989), ãThe redemption of the executiveä, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. i-iv. 

Schechter, H. (1995), Rekindling the Spirit at Work, Barrytown, Ltd, Barrytown, NY. 

Scherer, J. and Shook, L. (1993), Work & the Human Spirit, John Scherer & Associates, Spokane, WA. 

Schor, J.B. (1993), The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure, Basic Books, New York, NY. 

Vail, P.B. (1985), ãProcess wisdom for a new ageä, ReVISION, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 39-49. 

Vicek, D.J. (1992), ãThe domino effectä, Small Business Reports, Vol. 17 No. 9, Winter, pp. 21-5. 

Walker, R.G. (1989), ãThe imperative of leaders to create leadersä, Directors and Boards, Vol. 13 No. 2, Winter, pp. 21-5.

Copyright © 1997 MCB. All rights reserved.

Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol 10 Issue 2 Date 1997 ISSN 0953-4814

 

For questions or comments contact bibermang1@scranton.edu