Spirituality and Work
Module 7: The Quest for
Authenticity in the Work Place
RELS 2330.1WW
Instructor: David Sable
davidsable@eastlink.ca
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
1
Class 7 Objectives
➢ Introduce
the concept of authenticity
➢ Introduce a framework for considering
authenticity in the workplace
➢ Contemplate questions of our authenticity
at work
Note: This module is based on the work of Scott MacMillan, PhD, who now
teaches at Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax. The reading for this module
Is Scott MacMillan’s article “Existentialism, Spirituality and Work.”
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
2
The Progress Paradox
Disengagement
Progress
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
Technology
Medical care
Longevity
Wealth
Comfort
Choices
•
•
•
•
Stress/Anxiety
Depression
Drug dependency
Alienation from coworkers
• No control
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
3
Consider
“Man does not simply exist, but
always decides what his existence
will be, what he will become in the
next moment.”
- Man’s Search For Meaning, Victor Frankl
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
4
Authenticity
➢ Spirituality
in the workplace intersects with
the concern for authenticity: discovering
meaning for ourselves.
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
5
The Authentic Self
Situated in a Context
Self
• Self is created
each day, we
are always
changing,
making choices
unconsciously or
consciously.
Choice:
Possibilities for Change
Bad Faith
Authenticity
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
6
Consider
➢
“Meaningful work isn’t just
about the meaning of the
paid work we perform; it’s
about the way we live our
lives... it’s the alignment
of purpose, values,
relationships, and
activities that we pursue
in life.”
- Chalofsky (2003: 58)
Sisyphus is a figure from Greek
mythology who was condemned
to repeat forever the same
meaningless task of pushing a
boulder up a mountain,
only to see it roll down again.
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
7
A Framework for Authenticity at Work
1)
2)
3)
1)
2)
3)
Do I want to be at this
place where I work?
Do I enjoy the work
environment and the
work activities?
Does my work fit with
my non-work life?
Being-with-Others
How much do I enjoy being
around other people?
Do I prefer to work with
other people or alone?
Do the people I work with
affect me positively?
1)
Self
2)
Being at Work
Every Day
Acting on
Beliefs and
Values
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
3)
Does my work make me
feel worthwhile?
Is my work the main
place where I actualize
my beliefs and values?
Do I have other avenues
to actualize my beliefs
and values?
8
Defining our Work as…
•
•
•
Jobs – work to get paid
Careers – life-long professions that we think
contribute to society; work that has prestige
Your “Calling” – work that has personal
meaning; work that feels naturally fulfilling
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
9
Recommended Reading
➢
Baumeister, R. (1991). Meanings of life.
➢ Easterbrook, G. (2003). The progress paradox.
➢ Frankl, V. (1985). Man’s search for meaning.
➢ Fromm, E. (1976) To have or to be?
➢ Gini, A. (2000). My job, my self: Work and the
creation of the modern individual.
➢ May, R. (1953) Man’s search for himself.
➢ Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why
more is less.
copyright © 2019 by David Sable
10
Spirituality and Work
Module 8: Promises, Problems And
Dangers of Spirituality in the Workplace
RELS 2330
Instructor: David Sable
david.sable@smu.ca
copyright © 2019 David Sable
1
Objectives
➢ Introduce
key theories of organizational
development
➢ Explore the concepts of Authentic
Leadership
➢ Contemplate conventional values and
spiritual values
copyright © 2019 David Sable
2
Organizational Development
➢
Human resource development in the workplace
led to research on how organizations develop.
➢ Theories of organizational development
describe the behavior of people in work places.
copyright © 2019 David Sable
3
Theory X
copyright © 2019 David Sable
4
Theory Y
copyright © 2019 David Sable
5
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Spirituality in the workplace
https://web.archive.org/web/20100211014419/http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/
FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/maslow.htm
copyright © 2019 David Sable
6
Review: Spirituality in the Workplace
➢
“Spirituality in the Workplace is about individuals
and organizations seeing work as a spiritual
path, as an opportunity to grow and to contribute
to society in a meaningful way. It is about care,
compassion and support of others; about
integrity and people being true to themselves
and others. It means individuals and
organizations attempting to live their values
more fully in the work they do.”
-- Smith and Rayment
copyright © 2019 David Sable
7
Leaders Have a Shadow Side
copyright © 2019 David Sable
8
The Dilemmas of Authentic
Leadership
copyright © 2019 David Sable
9
The Promise of Authentic Leadership
www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2013/05/12/what-is-authentic-leadership/
www.mindfulleader.org/#home
copyright © 2019 David Sable
10
Remember the Core Messages
of the Antigonish Movement?
copyright © 2019 David Sable
11
Approaches to Spirituality and
Authentic Leadership
➢
identifying with something greater than our
ordinary self-interest;
➢ reflective practices that engage an inner journey:
e.g., meditation, prayer, contemplation, yoga, tai
chi, etc.
➢ Genuineness and trustworthiness; “walking the
talk;”
➢ the “promise” of the future: cultivating Theory Y
copyright © 2019 David Sable
12
Weekly Assignment: Do you think you could help others to appreciate
spiritual values in the workplace in addition to conventional values?
What would be the challenges?
Purpose of
Work
Needs
addressed
Conventional
Values
Achievement
Materialism
Comfort
Conformity
Winning
Survival, identity
Organization Maximize profit
Goal
World view
Winners & Losers
Survival of fittest
Spiritual Values
Authentic life –
meaningful work,
meaningful
existence
Respect, selfconfidence,
creativity and
cooperation
Benefits for society,
serve society; solve
big problems
Recognizing
Interdependence
copyright © 2019 David Sable
13
14025
EXISTENTIALISM, SPIRITUALITY, AND WORK: TOWARD A PARADIGM OF
AUTHENTICITY
Scott McMillan
Saint Mary’s University
August, 2006
ABSTRACT
This paper argues that existential philosophy offers particular insights into the individual
and organizations that should be incorporated into the management, spirituality and
religion discussion. The interest in spirituality and work is focusing attention on a major
problem in the workplace - work which lacks meaning for many people. However, the
relationship between meaning, work, and organizations is viewed from a number of
varying perspectives. Existential philosophy offers a new paradigm, one that focuses the
discussion on the creation of individual authenticity. This new paradigm has major
implications for how we view work, organizations, and the development of society.
Keywords:
Spirituality, Management, Transformation
1
14025
INTRODUCTION
The growing interest in management, spirituality and religion is focusing attention on the
relationship between work, spirituality, and individual meaning, and stimulating debate on a
major problem in the workplace, that is, a lack of meaning for the individual. Since work is for
most people a significant component of life it has a major effect on the challenge of living a
meaningful life.
It is hard for many of us to separate our work from the rest of our being…we spend too
much of our time at work or in work-related social and leisure activities for us to expect to
continue trying to compartmentalize our lives into separate work, family, religious and
social domains. As one result, the pressure many of us feel to recognize and respond to
the sacred in us must find outlet in the secular workplace. If personal or social
transformation is to take place, it will most likely take place at work. For, after all, life is
about spirit and we humans carry only one spirit that must manifest itself in both life and
livelihood. (Fairholm, 1996: 12)
According to many scholars personal meaning is one of the most important questions of
our era. Belliotti (2001: 10) states, “reflecting on the meaning of life may be spurred by
psychological crisis but it may also arise from an acute awareness that Henry David Thoreau was
correct: most people do lead lives of quiet desperation… the human condition is unique in that
we can evaluate and enhance our lives by confronting ultimate questions that resist simple
resolutions...to renounce the quest is to close off an important sense of human meaning.” Frankl
(1959: 121) notes, “man’s search for meaning is the primary motivation in his life and not a
“secondary rationalization” of instinctual drives…this meaning is unique and specific in that it
must and can be fulfilled by him alone; only then does it achieve a significance which will satisfy
his own will to meaning.”
However, personal meaning is complex and there are a variety of perspectives on the
relationship between spirituality, meaning, and our work lives. Howard (2002: 240) notes, “the
desire by many individuals to live lives which are compatible with the demands of their
spirituality is insistent and requires attention by practitioners and academics alike...this sense of
spirituality is provoking some far-reaching questions about the choices we make in our lives,
including how we view our work.” Despite a number of arguments for the incorporation of
spirituality into the workplace, it is unclear what this means, and what a “spiritual workplace” or
a “spiritual organization” would look like (Bell & Taylor, 2003; Butts, 1999; Garcia-Zamor,
2003; Howard, 2002; Ottaway, 2003).
Even if we accept spirituality as central to our world philosophy, we are insufficient in
our ability to understand this and to live with it. We might understand more of the
mysteries of the universe and the different levels of reality that exist but we still have
trouble connecting and applying this in our lives... spirituality provokes uncomfortable
questions in us and may mean confronting pain. Deep reflection on one’s life does not
represent an easy option and that is why many people avoid it. (Howard, 2002: 238)
The field of management, spirituality and religion is in need of a paradigm that can bring
together the various perspectives on meaning, spirituality, and work, and unite secular and nonsecular views in the spirituality and work field. Existential philosophy can provide the basis for
this new paradigm as it focuses on the individual and the creation of a meaningful or “authentic”
life. Webster (2004: 7) states, “Spirituality is understood to involve an engagement with the
2
14025
meaning of one’s life, and Existential philosophy is founded upon the premise that human
individuals have a concern for the meaning of their being.”
Existential philosophy has previously been utilized as a means of understanding the
individual under the context of human existence, most notably in the area of psychological
counseling (Barnes, 1959; Bugental, 1965; May, 1968). Bugental (1965: 1) states, “An existential
orientation to personality and psychotherapy recognizes the human existence as the central fact of
existence, examines the vicissitudes of that experience in the perspective of the basic nature of
being, and orients its growth-inducing efforts toward maximum accord with the whole of life.”
There have also been attempts to bring an existential perspective into the study of work and
organizations, but only by a limited number of management scholars (Kelly & Kelly, 1998;
Pauchant, 1993, 1995). This paper adds to the argument for the use of existential philosophy in
work and organizational analysis, specifically using the concept of authenticity as the basis for a
new paradigm. A paradigm of authenticity can unite the spirituality and work field and focus the
discussion on the impact work and organizations have on the individual and his/her desire to live
a meaningful life. Through this lens we view work and organizations primarily as a means of
achieving authenticity.
The paper is divided into three sections. Firstly, I will outline the current problem with
how we view and study meaning, work and organizations. Secondly, I will review existential
philosophy, with a focus on the concept of authenticity. Thirdly, I will discuss some of the
implications an authenticity paradigm would have on how we view work, organizations, and
society.
THE PROBLEM
Work serves a variety of needs for people including economic, social, challenge,
engagement, identity, and life fulfillment, and as a result it is a major part of what defines us as
human beings (Karp & Yoels, 1981; Law, Meijers & Wijers, 2002; Moen, 1998; Mutlu & Asik,
2002). Gini (2000: ix) notes, “work is the most common experience of adult life...some love it,
others hate it, but few of us are able to avoid it...because we spend two-thirds of our waking life
on the job, work is the way we come to know the world and are known to the world…work
becomes our identity, our signature on the world…to work is to be and not to work is not to be.”
Mills and Simmons (1999: 114-115) state:
…people do not leave their selves behind when they come to work. The workplace is
charged with emotionality, family concerns, sexuality, worries, hopes and dreams: try as
they may, persons cannot divorce their selves from the workplace. Organizations are
composed of persons with diverse psychological needs and behaviours which inevitably
come to influence, and are shaped by, working relationships.
Unfortunately, many of today’s organizations are described as “toxic environments” with
a variety of problems for employees: high levels of stress, depression, feelings of being treated
unfairly, bullying, low productivity, high absenteeism, turnover, and work-related health
problems (Browne, 2002; Gini, 2000; Jamal & Baba, 2000; Kimura, 2003; Lane, 1993; Leiter &
Maslach, 2001; Lerner, Levine, Malspeis & D’Agostino, 1994). Providing a positive environment
and a meaningful experience for the individual is generally a secondary consideration for the
average organization to the primary goal of profit maximization. Many researchers argue that the
emphasis on the maximization of profit has resulted in organizations detrimental to meaningful
existence (Bakan, 2004; Kimura, 2003). Bakan (2004: 159) argues that, “we have over the last
three hundred years constructed a remarkably efficient wealth-creating machine, but it is now out
of control.” Many organizations provide a system of meaning that “may be misplaced,
3
14025
manipulated cynically, and even destructive, and may engender myopia, resistance to change,
existential disappointment, and a loss of individuality” (Ashforth & Vaidyanath, 2002: 368). Gini
(2000: 199) comments that, “we have made work simultaneously compulsory and
unsatisfactory…work isn’t about what we want to do, but what others tell us to do.” Lane (1993:
65) notes, “Market economies have made us prosperous, but they do not maximize “utility” or
the satisfaction of human wants.” Almost thirty years ago, Levinson (1978) noted the negative
effects organizations had on the individual and questioned whether or not we were working
toward creating the type of organization that was conducive to development.
We are still learning how to create organizations that work productively, humanely and in
ways that support the adult development of their employees and clients. The aims of
productivity and profit making have had top priority in the industrial age that is now
passing. As we move into an age in which production and power might be less overriding
concerns, we have a chance to reorder our priorities. It remains to be seen whether we
shall give higher priority to enhancing the meaning of work and to creating work
organizations that foster development as well as productive efficiency. (Levinson, 1978:
338)
To address the problems of work and organizations a new and growing voice is the field
of management, spirituality and religion (Bell & Taylor, 2003; Dalton, 2001; Elmes & Smith,
2001; Fox, 2003; Garcia-Zamor, 2003; Harrington, Preziosi & Gooden, 2001; Howard, 2002;
Lavelle, 1999; Lips-Wiersma, 2002, 2002; McCormick, 1994; Mitroff & Denton, 1999; Ottaway,
2003; Tischler, 1999). Spirituality in the workplace is even being referred to as a new emerging
paradigm for business (Ashar & Lane-Maher, 2004; Dhiman & King, 2005). It is argued that:
…as a context for human development, work activities provide a venue for becoming
more than one used to be. In and through work, individuals develop themselves by
expressing the occupational interests, vocational talents, and work values that move them
from a felt negative to the perceived plus. This progressive development constitutes a
spiritual quest for meaning and self-completion that, in the process, helps people become
someone they want to be, a person they themselves would like. (Savickas, 1994: 5)
However, there are a variety of perspectives on management, spirituality and religion, and
there is no agreed upon vision for work and organizations or a common management/spirituality/
religion lens. Mitroff and Denton (1999: 83) define spirituality “as the basic feeling of being
connected with one’s complete self, others, and the entire universe.” Ashmos and Duchon (2000:
137) define spirituality at work as “the recognition that employees have an inner life that
nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place in the context of community”.
Ottaway (2003: 34) describes spirituality in the workplace in terms of “a source of energy
empowering and transforming the life of daily work…beyond the rational… creating a new
order.” Spirituality and work is regarded by some from a religious perspective, i.e., bringing
religious beliefs into work practices, while others view it from a secular perspective (Harrington,
Preziosi & Gooden, 2001; Marques, Dhiman & King, 2005). It has also been suggested that
spirituality at work can be viewed as either spirituality in work, or spirituality of work.
Spirituality in work “suggests that the two domains are separate but one can be exercised within
the context of the other” and spirituality of work means that “work is a vehicle of transcendence”
(Haroutiounian, Ghavan, Gomez, Ivshin, Phelan, Freshman, Griffin & Lindsay, 2000: 670-671).
It is understandable that there are a variety of perspectives on spirituality and work since
it is dependent on individual beliefs about meaning, and, “whatever one’s underlying belief
4
14025
system, everyone has a spiritual life, just as they have an unconscious, whether they like it or not”
(Howard, 2002: 234). Regardless of these different viewpoints, however, the common
denominator in the spirituality and work movement is the emphasis on finding meaning, and it is
in that goal that we might find unity.
We each need to find meaning and purpose and develop our potential, to live an
integrated life. Spirituality encompasses the way an individual lives out his or her sense of
interconnectedness with the world through an ability to tap into deep resources. It
encompasses such terms as truth, love, service, wisdom, joy, peace, and wholeness. It is
about self-awareness and about unity with others. It combines our basic philosophy
towards life, our values, with our conduct and practice. Hence the difficulty with
definition – spirituality is both highly individual and intensely personal, as well as
inclusive and universal. (Howard, 2002: 231)
Despite the many perspectives and lack of consensus, the management, spirituality and
religion field is focusing attention on a major problem in the workplace: work which lacks
meaning for many people. Pfeffer (1998: 112) notes, “people work for money – but they work
even more for meaning in their lives.” Harrington, Preziosi & Gooden (2001) comment that
spirituality and work “is about experiencing real purpose and meaning in their work beyond
paychecks and task performance” (155), and that, “workers now desire a stronger integration of
their spiritual values with their work and leaders will be forced to respond by accommodating the
transformation of a more humanistic workplace where spiritual principles and values become
integral parts of the organization’s culture” (162).
The problem of living a meaningful life, especially related to work, has been an issue of
society for decades.
The clearest picture of the empty life is the suburban man, who gets up at the same hour
every weekday morning, takes the same train to work in the city, performs the same task
in the office, lunches at the same place, leaves the same tip for the waitress each day,
comes home on the same train each night, has 2.3 children, cultivates a little garden,
spends a two-week vacation at the shore every summer which he does not enjoy, goes to
church every Christmas and Easter, and moves through a routine, mechanical existence
year after year until he finally retires at sixty-five and very soon thereafter dies of heart
failure, possibly brought on by repressed hostility. (May, 1953: 21)
It would seem that little has changed since May’s description of the typical life in 1953.
Fromm (1976: 5) notes, “we are a society of notoriously unhappy people: lonely, anxious,
depressed, destructive, dependent – people who are glad when we have killed the time we are
trying to save.” We have become accustomed to a rather mundane existence, resulting in a loss of
self but we still long for a different existence (Gaarder, 1994: 15). Therefore, despite unparalleled
technological and material progress, finding meaning is difficult especially when it comes to
work.
Adding to the challenge of living a meaningful life is our current Western society. Despite
apparent progress and advances in many areas, e.g., medical, technology, and standard of living,
well-being and happiness levels have decreased, while anxiety, depression, use of medication,
and suicide levels have increased (Easterbrook, 2003). And, personal meaning has increasingly
become attached to consumption and material gain, i.e., the more I own, the more meaningful my
life (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Easterbrook, 2003; Fromm, 1976; Wattanasuwan, 2005).
Csikszentmihalyi (1999: 823) states, “Dependence on material goals is so difficult to avoid in
5
14025
part because our culture has progressively eliminated every alternative that in previous times used
to give meaning and purpose to individual lives.” Fairholm (1996) relates this to the diminished
role of religion and comments that “for most of human history no one had to search for the
spiritual in their lives…at the core of every culture was a religion, with sacred times and places
set aside for public rituals...for many these holy places are less and less familiar today” (17).
Perhaps because the heyday of utilitarian philosophy coincided with the start of the
enormous forward strides in public health and in the manufacturing and distribution of
goods, the majority of those who thought about such things assumed that increases in
pleasure and happiness would come from increased affluence, from greater control over
the material environment. The great self-confidence of the Western technological nations,
and especially of the United States, was in large part because of the belief that materialism
– the prolongation of a healthy life, the acquisition of wealth, the ownership of consumer
goods – would be the royal road to a happy life. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999: 822)
However, it should be obvious to us by now that a life spent in the pursuit of materialism
is a shallow life based on superficial meaning. An emphasis on monetary values above all else,
“renders us increasingly insensible to the inherent qualities of life and to the real beauty and
giftedness of being” (Gay, 2004: 17), and a continuing trend toward materialism paints a bleak
picture for the future of humanity. Greening (1971: 9) states, “self-actualization tendencies must
compete with many other tendencies as man proceeds to make his own nature…conceivably, man
may evolve in such a way as to lose his self-actualization drive and diminish his potential.”
Many people have now reached a “boiling” point with their lack of meaning and hunger
for a more fulfilling experience, especially as it pertains to their work life (King & Nichol, 1999;
Herman & Gioia, 1998; Neck & Millman, 1994; White, 2001).
Today’s worker is no longer willing to work in an authoritarian and dehumanizing
environment. Workers want meaning in their work and balance in their lives. Given the
amount of time people spend at work, they want opportunities to contribute and to know
how their work contributes to the organization. They also want to be valued as individuals
with goals and aspirations, not just replaceable drones in the hive (Herman & Gioia, 1998:
24).
Cacloppe (2000: 1) comments, “We are at a time in history when we need to revise our
entire view of ourselves, the nature of work and leadership of organizations.” The tragic events of
9-11 have also had an effect and resulted in many people re-evaluating their lives and their work,
as they search for a deeper meaning in life beyond career success (Cannon, 2002; Garcia-Zamor,
2003; Howard, 2002; Wrzesniewski, 2002). Butts (1999: 329) notes “business owners, managers,
policymakers, and academic researchers all need to remember, as many surveys indicate, that
tens of millions of world citizens are hungering for transmaterial, mind-expanding, soulenriching, and heart-centred (spiritual) values.”
The workforce in corporate America is about to explode. For years, external forces, such
as technological advances and market demand shifts, have driven organization change and
direction. To sustain an organization, leaders and consultants develop change initiatives
often without including the very people who will be charged with implementing them.
Within the past decade, a fuse has been gradually and steadily burning from the inside of
the organization…from its people. The burning fuse has been unstable work environments
too concerned with advancement and survival to lend support to two basic human needs
of employees: to build meaning in an employee’s own life through their work and to
6
14025
cultivate an environment that encourages the growth of the human spirit. (White, 2001:
47)
The problem, therefore, with how we currently view and study meaning, work and
organizations is three-fold: (1) the current nature of the organization can work against the
creation of individual meaning; (2) the relationship between management, spirituality and
religion is not clear and viewed from many perspectives, and; (3) society encourages only a
superficial level of meaning connected to career success and materialism. We turn now to the
philosophy of existentialism to provide us with new insights into the individual and, therefore,
new directions for management, spirituality and religion.
EXISTENTIAL PHILOSOPHY - AUTHENTICITY
Existential philosophy is a multi-faceted view of the nature of individual “Being”, and as
such, is made up of many varying perspectives (Breisach, 1962: Burrell & Morgan, 1979; Cotkin,
2003). Sartre (1970: 25-26) argued that, “the word is now so loosely applied to so many things
that it no longer means anything at all.” However, there is general agreement that Existential
philosophy attempts to make sense of and provide answers to the circumstances and dilemma of
the human condition. It has been described as an “endeavor to grasp reality [and] arises directly
out of Western man’s anxiety, estrangement, and conflicts” (May, 1959: 19). It attempts “to be
responsive to the predicament of modern man and to supply an interpretation of his anguish and
aspirations” (Collins, 1952: 3). Existential thought provides a direction for humanity, as it
highlights the possibilities of human existence and what can be for individual life. Sartre (1970:
24) states, “Existentialism, in our sense of the word, is a doctrine that does render human life
possible…which affirms that every truth and every action imply both an environment and human
subjectivity.” Existential philosophy “attempts to understand how events in life fit into a larger
context…involves the process of creating and discovering meaning, which is facilitated by a
sense of coherence (order, reason for existence) and a sense of purpose (mission in life,
direction)” (Reker & Chamberlain, 2000: 1). Breisach (1962: 4-5) notes, “Existentialists have
asked for a life in which man continuously questions his purpose and accepts responsibility for
his actions, one which truly reflects man’s special position in this world.”
Existentialism is rooted in nineteenth century Europe but it came into prominence shortly
after the end of World War II when many were questioning the human condition.
Existentialism, as a way of thinking about and depicting the world, emerged most
strongly out of the tremors and that shook modern Europe beginning in the nineteenth
century. The inhuman, alienating implications of modern capitalist production and
warfare, the unfulfilled promise of science, the decline of religious certitude, the
challenges issued by Darwin, Freud, and modern physics – all contributed to
existentialism’s claim to pertinence. Sartre and Heidegger expressed, in philosophical and
literary terms, the essentials of existentialism. In so doing, they attempted to characterize
aspects of the timeless nature of the human condition and to respond to the quickening
pace of alienation and despair in their own era. (Cotkin, 2003: 3-4)
Kierkegaard is generally credited with being the father of Existentialism as he was the
first to reject the emphasis on universalism in favor of a focus on the individual - “my listeners,
do you at present live in such a way that you are yourself clearly and eternally conscious of being
an individual?” (Kierkegaard, 1956: 195). However, many others have contributed to our
knowledge of Existential philosophy – Socrates, Plato, Husserl, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Camus,
Sartre, De Beauvoir, and Frankl, providing his/her own unique perspective (Collins, 1952;
7
14025
Cotkin, 2003; MacDonald, 2001; Wahl, 1969). For the Existentialists, “philosophy is essentially
the study of Being” (Wahl, 1969: 95). In effect, they challenge our beliefs and our conception of
what it means to be ‘human’, with the goal to encourage humanity to seek out an ‘authentic’
existence.
The existentialist writers hope to shatter our dogmatic beliefs and lure us into giving up
blindly accepted ethical norms and ideologies. Only when we successfully shed these
values that we have been conditioned to uphold by various institutions – our families,
schools and universities – will we be able to reach beyond them to the genuine roots of
our selves and ultimately attain authenticity. The unnecessary information we have
collected during our lifetimes, the ‘facts’ postulated as an integral part of the ethos of
objectivity fostered by society and its institutions, are inapplicable to the sphere of human
existence in which one struggles for one’s self. There, in their stead, the notion of
authenticity emerges. (Golomb, 1995: 8)
Existentialism focuses on the individual, and the concepts of authenticity, freedom,
choice, consciousness, and subjectivity (Barnes, 1959; Breisach, 1962; Sartre, 1956, 1970; Wahl,
1969). It is based on the premise that “existence precedes essence” - we are thrown into the world
and simply exist, and our essence is created through the lives we choose to live. Sartre (1970: 28)
comments, “what do we mean by saying that existence precedes essence…we mean that man first
of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world – and defines himself afterwards.”
Existential philosophy focuses on what it means to be human, i.e., the nature of “being.”
Bugental (1965: 27) defines “‘be-ing’ as a name for the process of self-aware existing.”
For the individual, existential philosophy emphasizes the creation of meaningful or
authentic life, and authenticity is unique to the individual. The starting point for authentic action
is the recognition that the human self is “the true center of philosophy and . . . the sole
legitimating authority” (Levine, 1984: 326). The individual must accept responsibility for his/her
life and make living an authentic life a continual and never-ending goal. Golomb (1995: 10)
notes, “though the term [authenticity] is indeed derived from auctoritas, the authority in question
is self-directed – it is the mastery of one who freely creates the pathos of authenticity and strives
to express and live it in the everyday.” Centuries ago Socrates noted that a key problem of
humanity was a lack of self-examination - “the unexamined life is not worth living.” This can be
interpreted as “the unexamined life is a wasted life,” one which we sleepwalk through (Morris,
1999). Socrates argued that we must question who we are and what is important in our life, and
that it is only through self-awareness that we then choose our lives and live a meaningful life
(McClelland, 1951). Bugental (1965: 31-32) comments, “a person is authentic in that degree to
which his being in the world is unqualifiedly in accord with the givenness of his own nature and
of the world…authenticity is the primary good or value of the existential viewpoint.”
An authentic life is possible only if we accept that the individual has freedom of choice.
Sartre contends that the individual is “free as a conscious being to choose the meaning that s/he
will give the facts in his/her situation” (Levine, 1984: 359). Sartre (1970: 41) states, “Man is
nothing else but what he purposes, he exists only in so far as he realizes himself, he is therefore
nothing else but the sum of his actions, nothing else but what his life is.” Sartre said we are
“condemned to be free”, i.e., freedom brings choice and subsequent responsibility for our actions
that perhaps we don’t want. It may be easier to deal with life if we feel that we believe that we
are not in control, and therefore cannot be totally responsible for our lives. Since we are free,
everything we do is a choice, and we define ourselves through our choices. Our freedom gives us
these choices, choices that result in the path that we follow, and ultimately in the life that we live,
8
14025
i.e., authentic versus inauthentic. As conscious beings, individuals “cannot logically be regarded
as causally determined by unconscious forces by antecedent psychological conditions” of his or
her life (Levine, 1984: 358).
The basic step in achieving inward freedom is “choosing one’s self.” This strangesounding phrase of Kierkegaard’s means to affirm one’s responsibility for one’s self and
one’s existence. It is the attitude which is opposite to blind momentum or routine
existence: it is an attitude of aliveness and decisiveness; it means that one recognizes that
he exists in his particular spot in the universe, and he accepts the responsibility for this
existence. This is what Nietzsche meant by the “will to live” – not simply the instinct for
self-preservation, but the will to accept the fact that one is one’s self, and to accept
responsibility for fulfilling one’s own destiny, which in turn implies accepting the fact
that one must make his basic choices himself. (May, 1953: 168-169)
However, the problem is that we are rarely conscious of this “being” process and tend to
act in “bad faith”, which means that the individual acts in accord with assigned definitions of self,
taking neither full credit or blame for his or her actions. It is “an attempt to escape from . . .
[individual] freedom by pretending that human affairs are unavoidable or necessary, as is the
causal order of things” (Levine, 1984: 361). This is echoed by Barnes (1959: 48) who comments,
“…man cannot bear the realization that all the values he lives by, his purposes, his projects are
sustained by his own free choice; he finds it too great a strain to accept sole responsibility for his
life. Therefore he takes refuge in the belief that somehow the external world is so structured that
it guarantees the worth of its objects, it provides specific tasks which have to be done, it demands
of each person a definite way of living which is the right one.” Authenticity is based on how the
individual views the world and his/her beliefs about meaning, and therefore, “each individual has
to come to her own conclusions about authenticity” (Golomb, 1995: 200). Bugental (1965: 33)
states, “authenticity is a term used to characterize a way of being in the world in which one’s
being is in harmony with the being of the world itself…we are inauthentic to the extent that we
are in conflict with the givenness of being.” The Authentic person recognizes that human
existence is a mystery, and he/she ventures forward creating meaning as he/she journeys through
life (Breisach, 1962).
Existential philosophy, then, provides compelling insights into the nature of human
existence. In particular, it gives us a way to view individual meaning, i.e., the necessity of living
an authentic life which must be defined by the individual. Authenticity, in relation to work,
therefore, can lead to exploring how work can become more meaningful for the individual.
A PARADIGM OF AUTHENTICITY
A paradigm of authenticity for management, spirituality and religion would focus our
attention on the nature of individual existence, because work and organizations would be viewed
within the context of the creation of authentic life. Golomb (1995: 200) notes, “the existential
question today is not whether to be or not to be, but how one can become what one truly is.” This
new paradigm has major implications for how we view work and careers, the issues with work
many encounter during mid-life, the nature of organizations, and society.
An authenticity view starts with the question, “what is the effect of daily work on
authentic life – does it contribute to or detract from the creation of authenticity?” All work is
considered in its relationship to meaningful existence, and how it fits with the individual’s
definition of authentic life. Chalofsky (2003: 58) comments, “meaningful work isn’t just about
the meaning of the paid work we perform; it’s about the way we live our lives...it’s the alignment
9
14025
of purpose, values, relationships, and activities that we pursue in life.” All work cannot be made
free of problems, but we can work toward ending the preformed self and the unquestioning
acceptance of work lives, and where all individuals are “free” to make choices. Gini (2000: 224)
notes, “Work will never be completely free of disappointment, drudgery, and toil, but all work
should, at least, offer the possibility of purpose and hope.” Individual beliefs about meaning and
authenticity should be the critical factor for individual choices and therefore how authenticity is
achieved. Baumeister (1991: 27) states, “people will act on the basis of how they interpret their
own lives, circumstances, and activities.” Only from an authenticity perspective can we make
choices about our lives which result in added meaning rather than the opposite.
A paradigm of authenticity highlights the importance of the “conscious” life, and the need
for the individual to choose work that aligns with his/her personal definition of an authentic
existence. The challenge for all of us is to determine what an authentic life consists of and to fit
our work within that framework of our existence. This means incorporating a longer term
perspective into how work and careers are viewed and therefore chosen. Baumeister (1991: 3)
comments, “Consideration of life’s meaning requires stepping back from the moment and seeing
events in a long-range context.” Leider (1976: 20) notes, “by taking a longer view of your life –
this avoiding short-term, “Band-aid” decisions – life/career planning helps deal with five basic
questions: Who am I? Who’s in charge of my life? What is the truth about the world of work?
What do I want most to accomplish? How do I go about it?” Since work is for most people a
significant component of their lives, it is important that decisions about careers are made in
relation to the individual beliefs about meaning.
The meaning of work is dependent on how it is viewed by the individual and this
viewpoint can change over time. What really matters is the relationship the work has on
authenticity for that particular individual. This fits with Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler and
Tipton’s (1985) three-component theory of work as viewed as a job, a career or a calling. A job is
work based solely on income, a career is for income plus a development path, and a calling is
work that the individual would engage in even if they had no financial need, and at each level the
personal investment increases (Bellah et al, 1985). Wrzesniewski, McCauley, Rozin and
Schwartz (1997) investigated Bellah et al’s (1985) three component theory of work (job, career,
or calling) and found considerable empirical support. They also found that it was not occupation
dependent, i.e., within the same occupation you could find people who viewed the same work as
a job, career or calling. The work itself does not necessarily matter, only how it is regarded by the
individual. For example, one person may view cleaning as simply a job, while another may view
it as a career, while another may relate it to serving the greater good, a calling. They note that
“satisfaction with life and work may be more dependent on how an employee sees his or her
work than on income or occupational prestige” (Wrzesniewski et al, 1997: 31). Lastly, they note
that the same work can start as a career or even a calling but over time turn into just a job. The
graduating university student may have great hopes to make being a lawyer an exciting career but
twenty years later he/she may view it as being only a job.
A paradigm of authenticity can also help us understand the problems many people
encounter with work in mid-life. We all go through stages of life and, “the nature of each era is
reflected in the evolution of a man’s careers in work, family and other settings, his involvement
in solitary and social enterprises, and his broader life plans and goals” (Levinson, 1978: 30). It is
natural for serious reflection to come with the period of life from age 35 to 45, the “mid-life
decade” and that the “mid-life crisis” can be a very real event in a person’s life. At this time a
person, “is likely to review his progress and ask: What have I done? Where am I now? Of what
value is my life to society, to other persons, and especially to myself? [and] he must deal with the
10
14025
disparity between what he has dreamed of becoming” (Levinson, 1978: 30). The mid-life point is
frequently a time when people experience a career plateau (Nachbagauer & Riedl, 2002). Many
people during this period in their lives ponder the question “what am I doing with my life”
(Cannon, 2002). It is then natural for people to change their expectations in their life prompting
them to seek out mid-career renewal (Leider, 1976). The mid-life questioning can be viewed as a
gap between “real” life and “authentic” life. If the individual feels his/her life is no longer or
perhaps never was authentic, i.e., living in bad faith, then it is natural for him/her to experience
anxiety and depression. Therefore, a paradigm of authenticity can help individuals understand
that it may be natural (and desirable) to undergo career changes throughout life, as the authentic
life is always a work in progress and continually being formed by the individual.
Through a paradigm of authenticity, organizations would be viewed in terms of their
effect on individual authenticity. What the individual experiences in the workplace and the
subsequent meanings that are attached to those experiences, can either contribute to or detract
from authentic life. An emphasis on authenticity highlights the need for us to re-evaluate the
nature of the organization, especially the goal of profit-maximization. Henning (1997: 35) argues,
“profit, quality, cycle time, and market share are not the core points of work…work is about
creating, sustaining, and enlarging the possibilities of life…this is why it has meaning.” Many
scholars argue, in fact, that creating is the core principle of authenticity.
Most accounts of authenticity are modeled on the aesthetic ideal of creativity:
spontaneous creation of one’s self and life. Yet no creativity is possible without the social
and cultural context that provides the raw material one uses – the conventions, ideas, and
institutions against which one must struggle to fashion one’s authentic self. Society
provides the ethical norms and potential sources of self-identity that must freely and
consciously be overcome, changed or assimilated into one’s life if one is to become what
one wants to be. (Golomb, 1995: 201)
Unfortunately, organizations can work against the goal of authentic life as they promote
conformity through rule adherence and social belonging, both of which can have a detrimental
effect on the individual. Pauchant (1995: 5) argues, “At a time when organizations are advocating
the myth of team spirit for achieving greater effectiveness, the realization of loneliness is
paramount because it allows one to understand that social belonging can become an escape from
one’s individuality.”
Lastly, a focus on authenticity has implications for the development of society as it shifts
the discussion to the creation of an “authentic” society. As previously noted, there are many
problems with our current society and hence, the direction of our world. However, despite the
condition of current society, many scholars are optimistic that we can change direction and move
toward a different kind of world. Hubbard (2002: 359) states:
The human species is facing a great transition from one stage of evolution to the
next…Homo sapiens have gained unprecedented technological and social power to either
destroy this world as we know it, or to co-create an immeasurable future…we stand at a
threshold, and it has become clear that if we continue to use our new powers in the same
state of consciousness in which we created them, we can wreak havoc upon ourselves and
the other species of earth...but if we use our new powers wisely, we will transcend the
current human condition, not only solving our problems but participating in the cocreation of futures that are chosen, open-ended and ever-evolving.
11
14025
Hubbard calls for the conscious evolution of humanity which she defines as “the capacity
to be aware of the process of evolution and to guide that process for the good of all Earth life”
(Cornish & McGuinness, 1993: 39). Other scholars agree with Hubbard’s assessment that we can
determine the world’s fate and argue for the need to re-evaluate what we deem to be “success.”
…we need to redefine the good life as it is equated with purchasing power. The dream of
the home in the suburbs as fulfillment and success brings with it the fears of losing all that
we have worked so hard to attain. We rightly have a sense of personal pride and
accomplishment; however, this must be coupled with a real sense of connectedness to the
world at large. In “making it,” we must begin an exploration of the questions of integrity,
human consequences, rootlessness, and salvation. How misguided is our identification of
happiness, and how blind is our pursuit? (Natale & Neher, 1994: 240)
A focus on authenticity will result in an increased awareness of the current state of the
world and likely lead to new choices with different societal outcomes. As existential philosophers
argue, people do not just affect themselves when they make choices; they also affect others, and
the society itself. “As our future becomes increasingly the object of our own selection, it is no
longer possible to avoid the question of the kind of future we want...do we want a more equal
distribution of income or a less equal distribution…do we want big business or little
business…do we want labor unions or circumscribed labor unions…do we want inflation or
deflation…all these choices – and many others – lie within our own control” Heilbroner, 1972:
319). An authenticity perspective will change the way we regard all of our institutions and
hopefully lead to changes that will in turn affect the direction our world takes in the 21st century.
Hopefully we will consciously move toward a world where all people are considered equal,
poverty and conflict anywhere is not acceptable, and individual life is focused on meaningful or
authentic existence and the betterment of society.
CONCLUSION
Existential philosophy provides insights into individual existence and can be the basis for
a new paradigm for the study of work and organizations, one where the focus is individual
authenticity. A paradigm of authenticity can unite spirituality and work scholars, provide a new
way of viewing work and organizations, and elevate the discussion of individual meaning to the
evolution of humanity. Since we are continually creating our concepts of work, organizations and
society, they all need to be viewed within the overall context of human existence and what it
means to live an authentic life.
First of all, we need to stop viewing work and organizations from a mainly utilitarian
perspective, blindly accepting the current nature of work and the organization. Work must be
considered based on its effect on the individual life. Organizations need to be viewed as a tool for
humanity, serving the individual and not as just a profit-making machine for a few. Forty years
ago Bugental (1965: 403) stated, “In a society of Emergent Man the social institutions with which
we are familiar – education, religion, government, business, science, the arts, entertainment, the
healing arts, the military, would certainly be materially revised in every instance...I cannot think
of one that would survive unchanged…this is not really surprising if we think of institutions as
the instruments of common human purposes.” Unfortunately, we are still waiting for this change
to take place. We also need to move away from the emphasis on materialism and comfort, and
instead focus on what it means to be human. We must focus on “being” and on how individuals
attempt to create the authentic life. The challenge is for people to be more aware of the role of
work in their lives and where it fits within their personal definition of a “meaningful existence.”
12
14025
People need to understand that work can be viewed in different ways in relation to their life and
that this can change throughout the adult lifecycle. There is a need for courses in “meaningful
living”, i.e., authentic life, and work in higher education and training for career counselors so that
when providing advice to clients, they can discuss how the individual views the role of work in
his/her life. The main purpose is to help people understand how they view work so that they can
make good career/life decisions. We need to help people determine what is meaningful to them as
they consider paths in life and education and work opportunities. We must encourage them to
ask, “What is this life I am living?” It is time to raise our sights both for ourselves as individuals
and for the future of humanity and our planet.
In summary, a paradigm of authenticity for management, spirituality and religion would:
(1) emphasize the goal of individual authenticity; (2) view work and organizations as primarily a
vehicle for authenticity, and; (3) focus on an evolving world based on an authentic society. I
believe that our current situation has reached the point where it is now time to shift our emphasis
to the nature of the individual quest: to make sense of this world through the lives we choose to
lead and through living an authentic life. A paradigm of authenticity does not provide us with all
the answers but it does provide the right context and hence the right questions that need to be
addressed.
13
14025
REFERENCES
Ashar, H. & Lane-Maher, M. (2004). Success and spirituality in the new business paradigm.
Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(3), 249-260.
Ashmos, D.P. & Duchon, D. (2000). Spirituality at work: A conceptualization and measure.
Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(2), 134-145.
Bakan, J. (2004). The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. New York:
Free Press.
Barnes, H.E. (1959). Humanistic existentialism: The literature of possibility. Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press.
Bell, E. & Taylor, S. (2003). The elevation of work: Pastoral power and the new age work ethic.
Organization, 10(2), 329-349.
Bellah, R.N.; Madsen, R.; Sullivan, W.M.; Swidler, A. & Tipton, S.M. (1985). Habits of the
heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Boelen, B.J. (1971). Existential thinking. New York: Herder and Herder.
Breisach, E. (1962). Introduction to modern existentialism. New York: Grove Press.
Bugental, J.F.Y. (1965). The search for authenticity. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London:
Heinemann.
Butts, D. (1999). Spirituality at work: An overview. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 12(4), 328+.
Cacloppe, R. (2000). Creating spirit at work: Re-visioning organization development and
leadership – part 1. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(1/2), 48-54.
Cacloppe, R. (2000). Creating spirit at work: Re-visioning organization development and
leadership – part 2. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(1/2), 110119.
Cannon, A. (2002). Left a good job for meaning. U.S. News & World Report, Feb. 18, 132(5),
44-45.
Chalofsky, N. (2003). Meaningful work. Training & Development, 57(12), 52-58.
Collins, J. (1952). The Existentialists: A critical study. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company.
Cornish, E. & McGuinness, K. (1993). Conscious evolution: Examining humanity’s next step.
The Futurist, 27(5), 38-42.
Cotkin, G. (2003). Existential America. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). The mythic potential of evolution. Zygon, 35(1), 25-38.
Dalton, J.C. (2001). Career and calling: Finding a place for the spirit in work and community.
New Directions for Student Services, 95, 17-25.
Easterbrook, G. (2003). The Progress Paradox: How life gets better while people feel worse.
New York: Random House.
Elmes, M. & Smith, C. (2001). Moved by the spirit: Contextualizing workplace empowerment in
American spiritual ideals. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(1), 33-50.
Fairholm, G.W. (1996). Spiritual leadership: Fulfilling whole-self needs at work. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 17(5), 11+.
Fox, L. (2003). The role of the church in career guidance and development: A review of the
literature 1960-early 2000s. Journal of Career Development, 29(3), 167-182.
Frankl, V. (1959). Man’s search for meaning. New York: Washington Square Press.
Fromm, E. (1976) To Have or to Be? New York: Harper and Row.
Gaarder, J. (1994). Sophie’s World. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
14
14025
Garcia-Zamor, J. (2003). Workplace spirituality and organizational performance. Public
Administration Review, 63(3), 355-363.
Gay, C.M. (2004). Cash values: money and the erosion of meaning in today’s society. Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Gini, A. (2000). My job, my self: Work and the creation of the modern individual. New York:
Routledge.
Golomb, J. (1995). In search of authenticity: From Kierkegaard to Camus. London: Routledge.
Greening, T.C. (1971). Introduction. In Greening, T.C. (Ed). Existential humanistic psychology.
Belmont: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. 1-14.
Haroutiounian, A.; Ghavan, S.; Gomez, S.J.; Ivshin, E.; Phelan, S.; Freshman, B.; Griffin, M &
Lindsay, C. (2000). Learning and being: Outcomes of a class on spirituality in work.
Journal of Management Education, 24(5), 662-681.
Harrington, W.J.; Preziosi, R.C. & Gooden, D.J. (2001). Perceptions of workplace spirituality
among professionals and executives. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal,
13(3), 155-163.
Heilbroner, R.L. (1972). The worldly philosophers: The lives, times, and ideas of the great
economic thinkers. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Henning, J. (1997). Living in a world of doubts and possibilities. Journal for Quality &
Participation, 20(5), 32-36.
Herman, R.E. & Gioia, J.L. (1998). Making work meaningful: Secrets of the future-focused
corporation. The Futurist, Dec, 24-38.
Hillman, J. & Ventura, M. (1992). We’ve had a hundred years of psychotherapy – And the
world’s getting worse. HarperSanFrancisco.
Howard, S. (2002). A spiritual perspective on learning in the workplace. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 17(3), 230-242.
Hubbard, B.M. (2002). Conscious evolution: The next stage of human development. Systems
Research and Behavioural Science, 20, 359-370. Published online in Wiley InterScience.
Jaccaci, A. & Gault, S. (1999). Chief evolutionary officers: The amazing business of conscious
evolution. Strategy & Leadership, 27, 21-27.
Jamal, M. & Baba, V.V. (2000). Job stress and burnout examination. Canadian Journal of
Public Health, 91(6), 454+.
Karp, D.A. & Yoels, W.C. (1981). Work, careers, and aging. Qualitative Sociology, 4(2), 145166.
Kelly, J. & Kelly, L. (1998). An Existential-Systems Approach to Managing Organizations.
Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books.
Kierkegaard, S. (1956). Purity of heart: Is to will one thing. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
King, S. & Nicol, D.M. (1999). Organizational enhancement through recognition of individual
spirituality: Reflections of Jaques and Jung. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 12(3), 234+.
Lane, R.E. (1993). Does money buy happiness? Public Interest, 113, 56-65.
Lavelle, J.L. Jr. (1999). The spirituality of work. Life Association News, 94(2), 130-131.
Law, B.; Meijers, F. & Wijers, G. (2002). New perspectives on career and identity in the
contemporary world. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 30(4), 431-449.
Leider, R.J. (1976). Mid-career renewal. Training and Development Journal, May, 16-20.
Leiter, M.P. & Maslach, C. (2001). Burnout and quality in a sped up world. Journal for Quality
and Participation, 24(2), 48-51.
15
14025
Lerner, D.J.; Levine, S.; Malspeis, S. & D’Agostino, R.B. (1994). Job strain and health-related
quality of life in a national sample. American Journal of Public Health, 84(10), 15801585.
Levine, T.Z., From Socrates to Sartre: The Philosophic Quest. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1984.
Lips-Wiersma, M. (2002). Analyzing the career concerns of spiritually oriented people: Lessons
for contemporary organizations. Career Development International, 7, 385-397.
Lips-Wiersma, M. (2002). The influence of spiritual “meaning-making” on career behavior. The
Journal of Management Development, 21, 497-520.
MacDonald, P.S. (2001)Introduction: Background and themes. In MacDonald, P.S. (Ed). The
existentialist reader. New York: Routledge. 1-46.
Marques, J.; Dhiman, S. & King, R. (2005). Spirituality in the workplace: Developing an integral
model and a comprehensive definition. Journal of American Academy of Business,
Cambridge. 7(1), 81-91.
May, R. (1953). Man’s search for himself. New York: Delta.
May, R. (1959). The origins and significance of the existential movement in psychology. In May,
R.; Angel, E. & Ellenberger, H. F. (Eds). Existence: A new dimension in psychiatry and
psychology. New York: Basic Books.
May, R. (1968). Existential psychology. New York: Random House.
McClelland, D.C. (1951). Personality. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
McCormick, D.W. (1994). Spirituality and management. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
9(6), 5-8.
Mills, A.J. & Simmons, T. (1999). Reading organization theory: A critical approach to the
study of organizational behaviour and structure. Toronto: Garamond Press.
Mitroff, I. & Denton, E.A. (1999). A spiritual audit of corporate America: A hard look at
spirituality, religion, and values in the workplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mitroff, I. & Denton, E.A. (1999). A study of spirituality in the workplace. Sloan Management
Review, Summer.
Moen, P. (1998). Recasting careers: Changing reference groups, risks, and realities. Generations,
22(1), 40-45.
Morris, T. (1999). Philosophy for dummies. Wiley Publishing Inc., New York.
Mutlu, E.S. & Asik, O. (2002). A look over the concepts of work and leisure throughout
important historical periods. Journal of American Academy of Business, 2(1), 12-19.
Nachbagauer, A.G.M. & Riedl, G. (2002). Effects of concepts of career plateaus on performance,
work satisfaction and commitment. International Journal of Manpower, 23(8), 716-774.
Natale, S.M. & Neher, J.C. (1994). Inspiriting the workplace: Developing a values-based
management system. In Bloch, D.P. & Richmond, L.J. (Eds). Connections between spirit
and work in career development. Davies-Black Publishing, Palo Alto, 237-255.
Neck, C.P. & Millman, J.F. (1994). Thought self-leadership: Finding spiritual fulfillment in
organizational life. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9(6), 9+.
Ottaway, R.N. (2003). Defining spirituality of work. International Journal of Value-Based
Management, 16(1), 23-35.
Pauchant, T.C. (1993). In search of existence: On the use of the existential tradition in
management and organization development. In Masserik, F. (Ed). Advances in
organization development, Volume 2. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation. 103-127.
Pauchant, T.C. (1995). Introduction: Toward a field of organizational existentialism. In Pauchant
& Associates (Eds). In search of meaning: Managing for the health of our
16
14025
organizations, our communities, and the natural world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers. 1-25.
Pfeffer, J. (1998). Six dangerous myths about pay. Harvard Business Review, 76(3), May/June,
108-119.
Savickas, M.L. (1994). The spirit in career counseling: Fostering self-completion through work.
In Bloch, D.P. & Richmond, L.J. (Eds). Connections between spirit and work in career
development. Palo Alto: Davies-Black Publishing. 3-25.
Sartre, J. (1956). Being and nothingness. New York: Philosophical Library.
Sartre, J. (1970). Existentialism and humanism. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
Tischler, L. (1999). The growing interest in spirituality in business: A long-term socio-economic
expansion. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(4), 273+.
Wahl, J. (1969). Philosophies of existence. New York: Schocken Books.
Webster, R.S. (2004). An existential framework of spirituality. International Journal of
Children’s Spirituality, 9(1), 7-13.
White, K.L. (2001). Revolution for the human spirit. Organization Development Journal, 19(2),
47-57.
Wrzesniewski, A.; McCauley, C. Rozin, P. & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings:
People's relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21-33.
Wrzesniewski (2002) It's not just a job: Shifting meanings of work in the wake of 9/11. Journal
of Management Inquiry, 11(3), 230-234.
17
Purchase answer to see full
attachment