A new phenomenon is transforming many organizations of work. It seems to have begun in the 1970’s, taken root in the 80’s and is growing rapidly in the 90’s and into the 21st century. I would like to call this phenomenon “a new expression of Spirit at work.”

By ROBERT L. WAHLSTEDT

A new phenomenon is transforming many organizations of work. It seems to have begun in the 1970’s, taken root in the 80’s and is growing rapidly in the 90’s and into the 21st century. I would like to call this phenomenon “a new expression of Spirit at work.” Out of my Christian tradition and commitment, I am very comfortable calling this spirit the “Spirit of God” but, in respect for the many who are part of this phenomenon and come from a different religious tradition or do not confess a religious commitment, I prefer to use the term “Spirit” alone. I will, however, throughout this essay capitalize “Spirit” so that it will be understood as something more than “enthusiasm” or “energy.” I am quite sure that this new expression of Spirit has its roots in the mysterious, animating force that gives life meaning and purpose.

It is interesting, even provocative, that this new expression of Spirit is taking place in organizations of work. Some of Robert Greenleaf’s writings on “Servant Leadership” may shed some light on why this might be. He posits that a good society is characterized by the more gifted and the less gifted serving each other and, further that this serving, which was primarily done individually in the past, is more and more taking place through organizations, businesses, non-profits and churches. I think that it also has to do with the fact that we are spending more and more of our time and more and more of our energy at work. It is no longer possible to see work as simply a means to fund the real purpose of our lives. If we do not find meaning and purpose in our work, most of us will not find it at all because we do not have any time or energy left for it. Furthermore, I believe that the growing presence of women—who are less willing to be separated from their emotional and spiritual intelligence —in organizations creates a fertile field for this Spirit.

I am calling this a “new” expression because it is different in several ways from previous expressions of a religious or spiritual nature. In the past, many individuals attempted to connect their religious convictions with their work. The manifestations of these attempts usually were very personal and individualistic. They involved a commitment to honesty, perhaps unselfishness and often were accompanied by an evangelistic agenda. The CBMC, Christian Businessmen’s Committee, is an example of an organization that supports this more personal manifestation of Spirit at work.

The “new” expression of Spirit at work is directed at the organization itself. It asks the question, “What does it mean for the organization to be faithful?” It examines and critiques the structure and policies of the organization. It expects there to be alignment between these, the organizations goals and the personal values and principles of the people who work there. It expects that the people who work in the organization will be proud of what the do and how they do it. It expects that people can become all that they are created to be through the process of work.

I have observed four characteristics that define this new expression of Spirit at work.

PURPOSE

The first has to do with “purpose.” What does the organization exist for? In the past and even today in the world of finance, the answer to this question was “to maximize shareholder wealth.” The new expression of Spirit rejects this answer as being at least incomplete if not corrupting. Seeing Things Whole, an organization that supports this new expression of Spirit, posits that the purpose of the organization can be thought of as “threefold,” mission, identity and stewardship. The “mission” is the product or service that it provides to the community it serves. This product or service and the way in which it is presented must serve the “common good.” Dick Broholm, founder of Seeing Things Whole, believes that “a strong critique of the end results—products—of our work needs to be made and we need to sharpen and enrich our ability to make such a critique. We must struggle with the negative effects of our work on individuals, the environment and society if we are to move our organizations toward greater faithfulness.”

“Identity” concerns the “gathered life” of the organization. Michael Naughton at the University of St. Thomas teaches that work always has two effects; the most obvious is the effect on the product or service being delivered. The less obvious is the effect on the person doing the work. In a very real sense, work is forming the person who does the work. The new expression of Spirit values the effect on the person as well as the value of the product or service.

The third dimension of “purpose” is stewardship. This contains the responsibility to provide a return to the investors but not to the exclusion of the responsibilities to other “stakeholders” namely co-workers, customers, suppliers and the community. Furthermore, it contains a responsibility for sustainability so that the organization will continue to fulfill its responsibility to all stakeholders in the future. Some of us like to think of this stewardship responsibility as a “sacred trust.”

WHOLENESS (Integrity)

In the previous paragraphs, we saw how the new Spirit brings wholeness to the purpose of the organization. The second defining characteristic of the new expression of Spirit is the “wholeness” or “integrity” of individual workers. In the past, it was thought to be more efficient and effective to divide work into the smallest possible pieces so that each individual worker would only have to master small tasks. The automobile assembly line is a prime application of this thinking. The object was to make the work “foolproof.” The problem is that people are not fools and when we are treated as such we respond by living up to that expectation or, more frequently, with hostility to those who treat us that way. Henry Ford asked, “Why, when I only want to hire a pair of hands, do I get a whole person?” The new Spirit invites us all to bring our whole selves to work body, mind and spirit. Another sense in which we are invited to wholeness involves morals, ethics and values. Being whole means being the same person at work as at home, at church or in our communities. Being whole or having integrity means not being less than a complete person and not having to be a different person in different situations.

SILENCE

The third characteristic of the new expression of Spirit at work is “silence.” I use this term because it is the most inclusive term that I can think of. For many it involves prayer, for others meditation, reflection or contemplation. In my experience, however, everyone who testifies to a meaningful spiritual life at work, talks about frequent times of silence in which they are able to be in touch with a deeper source of wisdom, direction and courage. There does not seem to be any consistent form to these times of silence. For some it is very regular and structured, for others more spontaneous and casual. Some approach it with a religious sense, others more philosophically. In every case, however, it seems to meet a deep need to get in touch with a deeper part of self or a reality larger than self. My sense is that it is in these times of silence that people are able to sense the congruity or incongruity between their most deeply held values and what they do at work.

INCLUSIVITY

The last characteristic of the new expression of Spirit at work is “inclusivity.” This is a unique characteristic of the new Spirit. Whereas “purpose,” “wholeness” and “silence” are common expressions of all religions, inclusivity is usually not. In the past, most organizations—unless they have a specifically religious orientation—have excluded religion and spirituality because they tend to be divisive. I believe that this is because most religious people are not able to bring their spiritual insights and motivation into a pluralistic organization without also bringing them in “authoritatively” and often with an evangelistic agenda.

In order for people of other faith traditions, or no faith tradition, to take our spiritual perspectives and insights seriously, we must first recognize that they will not accept the authority of our tradition. This means that phrases like “because the Bible says so” will not be effective. The new Spirit teaches us to speak persuasively rather than authoritatively about our spiritual insights.

It is also necessary to abandon the objective of converting others to our faith tradition in this venue. We must “treat others as we would like to be treated.” This means that we must listen and hear and take seriously the spiritual insights that they bring to the conversation in the same way that we want them to listen and hear and take seriously the spiritual insights that we bring. Since we would object to their efforts to convert us to their faith we must not try to convert them to ours. To many Christians this may seem to be a denial of the “great commandment.” I would suggest that it is not because I believe that we are better “witnesses” to our faith when we speak persuasively, and when we respect others as we would want them to respect us. Furthermore, when we do try to pursue an evangelistic agenda, experience shows that the result is divisiveness and discord in a pluralistic organization. This leads to the exclusion of all spirituality and the moral desert that many organizations have become.

The new expression of the Spirit at work, the Spirit that is transforming many organizations into healthier, happier and even more productive workplaces is characterized by a greater sense of purpose, wholeness in the people who do the work, congruence between faith, values and actions through frequent times of silence and an inclusive environment that values and invites the spirituality of everyone.

Robert L. Wahlstedt is chairman of a US-based initiative called Seeing Things Whole (www.seeingthingswhole.org).

© 2003 Used with permission