The translation of self-spirituality into organizations

Introduction

This article proposes a reflection on the critique of the concept of self-spirituality, informed by an extended case study of the translation of self-spirituality into public schools and other Western mainstream organizations in Israel.

According to Charles Taylor, and other scholars, a cultural revolution has swept across the Western world over recent decades, which has ‘profoundly altered the conditions of belief in our societies’, shaping the contours of society as a whole (Taylor, 2007: 473). The focal point of this cultural revolution is the individual and personal experience; key aspirations are unity, integrity, and holism. The language of this new culture is replete with assertions and sensations of harmony, balance, flow, integrations, and ‘being at one’ (Taylor, 2007: 506–513).

As a dynamic cultural phenomenon, self-spirituality has gradually evolved from its counter-cultural origins into a more mainstream presence in Western societies (Hanegraaff, 1998; Heelas, 2008). But this growing interest in self-spirituality has been accompanied by criticism and concerns regarding its underlying ethics, albeit a critical perspective somewhat mediated by more positive evaluations (e.g. Bell and Taylor, 2004; Heelas, 2008; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009; McGhee and Grant, 2017; Rindfleish, 2005; York, 2001 ). In the main, the debate about self-spirituality culture is focused on two critiques. First, self-spirituality is often equated, negatively, with market orientation, several researchers describing the phenomenon as a ‘spiritual supermarket’ (Redden, 2016, quoting others; York, 2001). Other studies have described the appropriation and commoditization of various cultural traditions by self-spirituality (Rindfleish, 2005). However, not all scholars of self-spirituality subscribe fully to these arguments. For instance, Heelas (2008) argues that spirituality represents a meaningful alternative to consumer capitalism. By expanding the horizons of participants beyond narrowly individualistic and consumerist parameters, the spiritual producer introduces a post-materialistic, humanistic ethicality (Bell, 2009). Redden (2016) (like Heelas, 2008), proposes that any evaluation of self-spirituality should consider the subjective perspectives of its adherents. He argues that ‘New Agers’ acknowledge the existence of many possible spiritual routes, and believe in their own right to try these out.

A second critique of self-spirituality culture pertains to the very nature of the quest to discover the spiritual self. Several scholars argue that the freedom of individuals to express their inner nature through ‘spirituality’ has been subordinated to the demands of corporate business culture, and the needs of a competitive economy (Altglas, 2014; Watts, 2018).

The critique of workplace spirituality focuses mainly on the ways in which spirituality can be misused, particularly for managerial control (e.g. Bell and Taylor, 2003; Long and Mills, 2010) and for instrumental gain – that is, when spirituality is applied as an organizational resource, commonly for commercial gain in some form (Driscoll et al., 2019; Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007; Gotsis and Kortezi, 2008; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009 quoting others). Alongside this critique, however, there are many advocates of workplace spirituality, including many who argue that spirituality can exert a positive influence on the broader ethical orientation of organizations (Gotsis and Kortezi, 2008; McGhee and Grant, 2017).

While a number of studies have focused on self-spirituality discourse (Bell and Taylor, 2003; Gotsis, and Kortezi, 2008; Long and Mills, 2010), there is relatively little empirical research exploring the ways in which self-spirituality ideas and practices are actually translated into mainstream organizations (exceptions include Islam et al., 2017; Zaidman et al., 2009). We argue that a critique of self-spirituality that focuses only on its discourse is not sufficient. What is required is an analysis of the ways in which self-spirituality is translated and enacted in practice; an analysis explicitly directed toward examining this enactment in key societal institutions, such as the mainstream work environment, education, and health organizations.

Based on an extended case study focusing on the translation of ideas and practices associated with the culture of self-spirituality into state (public) schools, and drawing from similar research conducted in other mainstream organizations, this article presents an empirical account of the process of the translation of self-spirituality ideas and practices.

Our objectives in this article are as follows: first, to identify the ways in which self-spirituality ideas and practices are translated into public schools and other mainstream organizations; and second, to discuss these observations in light of the existing critique regarding workplace ethics and self-spirituality culture, mainly the claim that self-spirituality serves as a conduit for consumerism and instrumentalism. We selected the Israeli state (public) schools arena for our study of the incorporation of self-spirituality into mainstream institutions, precisely because schools are a primary site of socialization. Our analysis of the process of translation will focus on the labor of actors whom we term self-spirituality brokers. Self-spirituality brokers are individuals immersed in the practice, ideology, and language of self-spirituality, and who introduce self-spirituality practices into mainstream organizations like public schools. Another group of significant actors are the representatives of the organization in question – in the case of public schools, principals, teachers, and parents. Our research is informed by – among other factors – the literature on translation in management research. Within this domain, translation refers to the transformation and transportation of management concepts when applied to a different organizational context (O’Mahoney, 2016).

What is self-spirituality?

Self-spirituality is a multifaceted cultural phenomenon, incorporating ideas, concepts, and practices from a range of domains including esotericism, psychology, Eastern philosophy, complementary and alternative medicine, religion, feminism, the human potential movement, the ecology movement, and neo-paganism (Hanegraaff, 1998). In spite of its diversity of perspectives, scholars have identified several common core and interrelated dimensions of self-spirituality (Zaidman et al., 2017; Zemp and Liebe, 2019). The first is the transcendence of the self, that is, a belief that one is connected to other people, ideas, nature, or some kind of ‘higher power’ (Ashforth and Pratt, 2003). Closely linked to this is an emphasis on authentic selfhood and inner wisdom, and on connecting with these inner depths, including a focus on ‘self-actualization’ – that is, empowering one’s ‘authentic self’ (Flere and Kirbis, 2009; Sointu and Woodhead, 2008). Second, people who embrace self-spirituality tend to be committed to a vision of authentic selfhood-in-relation. Such relationality is conceived as fundamentally small-scale and egalitarian in outlook (Sointu and Woodhead, 2008). The third overarching dimension is holism and harmony, that is, the integration of different aspects of one’s self into a coherent and symbiotic conception of the self (Ashforth and Pratt, 2003; Flere and Kirbis, 2009). This dimension includes a focus on the body, which is understood as being the access point to unique selfhood, serving as a means of achieving greater well-being (Sointu and Woodhead, 2008). The fourth dimension is a belief in personal growth: a clear sense of what one seeks to become and what one needs to do in order to achieve self-actualization (Ashforth and Pratt, 2003).

The translation of self-spirituality into mainstream Western organizations

Brokers utilize several methods in translating spirituality ideas and practices into mainstream organizations. First, research shows that they ‘drop’ or change elements perceived as overly religious or mystical from their consultancy services (Kabat-Zinn, 2011; Zaidman et al., 2009). The introduction of the Buddhist term ‘mindfulness’, as in mindfulness-based stress reduction’ (MBSR) by Kabat-Zinn (2011: 289) is one example. The author describes how, at an early stage of his consultancy practice, he resolved to introduce MBSR in ways which avoided the ‘risk of it being seen as Buddhist, New Age, Eastern Mysticism, or just plain flakey’ as much as possible. This process of translation has been described by Fadlon (2005: 2) as domestication; a process ‘in which the foreign is rendered familiar and palatable to local tastes’. Similarly, Altglas (2014) demonstrates how neo-Hindu movements and the Jewish Kabbalah Center domesticated their teachings by presenting them as universal and meta-religious.

In order to domesticate spirituality, spiritual consultants use several techniques of ‘camouflage’ to mask the religious or mystical elements of their practice (Zaidman et al., 2009). First, they are introduced into organizations as conventional consultants. With time, once organization members have accepted their positioning, they then begin to introduce more overtly spiritual practices and concepts (Islam and Holm, 2016; Zaidman et al., 2009). Another form of camouflage involves brokers replacing the vocabulary of self-spirituality with a language more familiar to their clientele, such as references to rationality and data-justified rhetoric (Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman et al., 2009).

Second, brokers also make attempts to align self-spirituality with existing organizational values and perspectives. For example, several studies show how practitioners have presented spirituality as a technique that can be harnessed for profit-oriented ends, or as a tool for increasing competitiveness, effectiveness, productivity, and profit (Islam et al., 2017; Islam and Holm, 2016; Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman et al., 2009).

Translation research

Over the last 15 years or so, the theory of translation has become increasingly influential in the fields of management and organization studies (O’Mahoney, 2016). Translation is described in the literature as a process that frames elements of a community’s world-view in terms of another community (Pawlowski and Robey, 2004). Several studies discuss translation in terms of ideas that must be translated in order to pass through the cultural/identity membranes of the organization and be adopted successfully. These studies demonstrate that the interests, frames of references, core values, and identity of an organization’s members (Doorewaard and Bijsterveld, 2001; Fussel and George, 2000; Sevon, 1996) all have an impact on the translation process. Sevon (1996) uses the principle of ‘a logic of appropriateness’ to describe how translators choose those ideas that are perceived as socially appropriate and in accordance with organizational identity.

Several translation studies focus on the process of ‘boundary crossings’ (O’Mahoney, 2016; Sevon, 1996). In the present case, the general notion of ‘boundary crossings’ relates to the ways that self-spirituality practices ‘cross’ organizational boundaries. This perspective affords insight into the processes which allow for meanings to be translated between groups.

Research context

Study design

We collected data at two time points: between 2003 and 2005; and 9 years later, between 2011 and 2012. In both phases, we collected data at elementary and high schools, and a few kindergartens, across the country.

Findings

Following a close review of the data, we identified two modes of action employed by self-spirituality brokers when introducing and translating self-spirituality into public schools. First, they create boundary objects; second, they embrace a plasticity and pragmatism in their translation processes. By ‘pragmatism’, we mean a practical approach to problems, rather than feeling bound to ideological or abstract considerations.

Creating boundary objects

Proposals for extracurricular activity in public schools must pass required threshold requirements, set and maintained by gatekeepers. The gatekeeper, initially, is usually the AF person, followed by the school principal. Our data show that one of the mechanisms used by self-spirituality brokers to tackle this potential organizational obstacle was in fact, the embodiment of self-spirituality ideas and practices into a more or less formal structured product – that is, they gave it a name, defined its general rationale, and created a sequence of lesson plans, each with its own title, rationale, goals, and devices (e.g. exercises or games). As boundary objects, these programs contained self-spirituality ideas (language, images, practices) configured to align with the school’s program (e.g. structure, rationale).

The way in which a program focusing on yoga, guided imagination, and meditation was presented to a school serves as an example of such a new boundary object. In this case, when the core program was applied in schools, the content of its lesson plans were adapted to meet the needs of a particular population (e.g. a religious population or pupils in special education). In this kind of translation, the ‘common identity’ (Star and Griesemer, 1989) of yoga includes a number of postures, accepted as contributing to the children’s physical body and well-being and consequently legitimized by the participants. Besides these ‘common identity’ elements of the program, many yoga programs contain additional elements including social games and music, and specific knowledge content such as learning English letters or Jewish stories. The positioning of yoga as a boundary object involved the creation of diverse elements suitable for the children’s age and educational background.

Pragmatism in the actual enactment of self-spirituality

Discussion

Overall, the conclusion of our empirical investigation regarding patterns in translation choices at two points of time is that in the encounter with public schools, the data indicate that brokers translate self-spirituality practices and ideas consistently and in a particular way, and that this translation occurs in diverse contexts.

Based on the findings of the current study, and on the findings of research conducted in other mainstream organizations, we identify two specific means of translating self-spirituality by brokers. First, brokers frame their products as boundary objects. Existing research shows that self-spirituality brokers apply boundary objects (albeit not explicitly defined as such) in other public institutions. For instance, spiritual care providers – individuals who support terminally ill people – adjust their practices to reflect the patient’s age, religion, and personality (Zaidman, 2017). Likewise, several organizational consultants also construct their consultancy services as boundary objects – using, for instance, theories, models, and practices from organizational psychology and meditation (Zaidman et al., 2009).

We argue that the creation of boundary objects assists in the adaptation of ideas or practices to local needs (Star and Griesemer, 1989). It also makes it possible for brokers to introduce their services to diverse audiences, while reducing the effort required to make entirely new products.

Second, brokers embrace adaptivity and pragmatism in their translation processes. They use self-spirituality practices to evoke diverse (at times contradictory) meanings. Our data show that self-spirituality brokers create and recreate programs that can be matched to different values, such as individualistic and/or collectivistic values. In our case, the influence of the global neoliberal discourse, with its emphasis on functionality and instrumental goals (Yonah et al., 2008) appeared as dominant in the educational system, in both the first and second phases of data collection. According to this ideology, individuals are envisioned as autonomous and fully responsible for their choices. The discourse employed was dominated by the vocabulary of skills, including the notion of teaching as a process based on the transfer of skills. Yet, self-spirituality brokers also adapted their consultancy toward strengthening classroom cohesion – an objective that embodies an entirely separate set of values, such as emphasizing national collectivistic values (Katriel and Nesher, 1986).

A similar characteristic of the work of brokers is described in Islam et al.’s (2017) study about the construction of mindfulness programs. The authors argue that the mindfulness concept can be read as an ‘empty signifier’ with regard to its capacity to encode and contain a range of social contradictions. They demonstrate how, in the course of mindfulness programs, these oppositions are framed in such a way as to align with dominant managerial perspectives. One can argue that the use of self-spirituality practices that may well evoke different (and even contradictory) meanings that suit the needs of specific audiences is mainly motivated by pragmatism.

In addition, on the basis of existing research, it can be argued that the attempts to domesticate spirituality involve several processes with a pragmatic orientation. First, brokers omit ideas, practices and language overtly associated with religion and mysticism. Such an approach was evident in the public schools discussed in this article; in for-profit organizations (Islam and Holm, 2016; Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman et al., 2009); and in medical institutions (Fadlon, 2005; Kabat-Zinn, 2011; Zaidman, 2017). Second, in public schools as well as in for-profit organizations, brokers apply specific incremental tactics, such as the progressive disclosure of certain self-spirituality contents (or objects), depending on their assessment of the audience’s receptivity to this (Islam and Holm, 2016; Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman et al., 2009). They also use camouflage (Zaidman et al., 2009) and concealment (Zaidman et al., 2009). We found only minor evidence in our data relating to these latter two tactics.

Conclusion

The study of self-spirituality has tended to be preoccupied with the study of discourse. Instead, this study provides a perspective which focuses on the practice of the process of institutionalizing spirituality. The article offers an interpretive qualitative analysis of rich field-based data concerning the translation of self-spirituality into public schools. This yields two main contributions to our understanding of the topic.

First, our data show that self-spirituality brokers are actively involved in ‘extending’ the ‘spiritual marketplace’ (Redden, 2016; York, 2001). That said, their focus is not on the production of objects, but rather on the creation of new services. In schools, brokers are involved in the creation, translation, and introduction of various programs for pupils. Brokers are also involved in the creation and translation of consultancy services for for-profit organizations, and in the translation of meditation programs for health care institutions and for-profit organizations (Islam et al., 2017; Kabat-Zinn, 2011; Zaidman et al., 2009). The study contributes to existing research by identifying the specific methods applied by brokers (e.g. boundary objects, services which evoke different meanings, domestication) toward the expansion of the self-spiritual services market into organizational life.

However, while the results of this study support the general claim regarding self-spirituality market orientation, we have consciously avoided taking an overly critical tone. We suggest that in order to solidify a more balanced view of self-spirituality in that regard, certain characteristics of self-spirituality culture should be considered from an emic perspective. We accept the argument that the subjective perspectives and experiences should be taken into account (e.g. Heelas, 2008; Redden, 2016; see also Watts, 2018). In our view, any consideration of the ethics of the translation of self-spirituality practices should consider the alternatives it introduces into the day-to-day reality of school children and employees in organizations. Taken from this perspective, and based on empirical data, it seems that at least to some extent, the translation of self-spirituality in organizations produces rich alternatives that not only confirm the status quo, but positively challenge it. Our analysis shows that several novel self-spirituality practices are indeed perceived as useful and valuable to organization members. This interpretation supports Heelas’ (2008) argument that self-spirituality practices expand the horizons of participants, and that they introduce – at least to some extent – a humanistic ethicality in organizations.

It has been argued that one of the fundamental characteristics of self-spirituality is the belief in the existence of many possible – and valid – spiritual routes (Redden, 2016, quoting others); a reliance on diverse resources (Hanegraaff, 1998); and diverse ways of product creation (Zaidman et al., 2009) – all of which might explain the role of self-spirituality brokers in ‘extending’ the ‘spiritual marketplace’. Thus, instead of a narrowly constructed argument highlighting the market orientation of self-spirituality, the article proposes a wider perspective, one that does not discard positive aspects of the process, nor its embeddedness in a particular culture and belief.

Our second contribution pertains to claims regarding the instrumentalism of self-spirituality (Brophy, 2015; Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009). An identifiable tendency in the data from public schools supports the argument that spirituality is constructed as a form of capital which enhances the capabilities of individuals. The results of this study show that in Israeli public schools, spirituality is translated, among other means, as a tool for reducing classroom violence; as a set of practices which can enhance pupil’s learning competencies; or as capital that can guide pupils in shaping their future more effectively. While the first aspect of this translation demonstrates the instrumentality of self-spirituality as it accommodates the specific needs of public schools, the latter aspect of translation supports the general claims about self-spirituality becoming ‘spiritual capitalism’ in organizations. In schools and for-profit organizations, self-spirituality is often translated as a technique for achieving profit-oriented ends, as well as a tool for improving and increasing organizational competitiveness, effectiveness, and productivity (Islam et al., 2017; Islam and Holm, 2016; Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman et al., 2009).

This study shows that in the main, the instrumentalism of self-spirituality is prevalent not only when it is enacted in for-profit organizations (Karjalainen et al., 2018), or as a fundamental principle in the discourse of the workplace (e.g. Brophy, 2015; Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007), but also in public schools. These findings are important because they demonstrate that even at an early age, and more particularly in sites dedicated to socialization, young people are exposed to self-spirituality practices construed in very specific ways.

However, the data from public schools also show that brokers translate self-spirituality practices in a way that is not always directly linked to instrumentality. Results show that certain self-spirituality practices (e.g. touch, yoga, and meditation) have certainly been translated in a way which maintains their core ideas: developing a ‘healthy’ connection with others; a focus on the body as a means of achieving greater well-being (Sointu and Woodhead, 2008); and a focus on holism and harmony (Ashforth and Pratt, 2003). Similarly, in for-profit organizations, brokers go to great lengths to introduce practices which can enhance the authenticity, intuition, awareness, and holism of participants (Zaidman et al., 2009). Otherwise, they incorporate ideas such as ‘letting go’, acceptance, and generosity in mindfulness programs (Islam and Holm, 2016; Karjalainen et al., 2018).

As for the claims regarding the instrumentalism of self-spirituality, we suggest that the knowledge acquired in previous management studies can illuminate the topic. We have learned that translation, as a process, involves the framing of the elements of one community’s world-view in terms of another community (Pawlowski and Robey, 2004); and that the interests, frames of references, core values, and identity of organization members can have an impact on the translation process (Doorewaard and Bijsterveld, 2001; Fussel and George, 2000; Sevon, 1996).

Indeed, our data show that the particular process of the translation of self-spirituality solidifies over the course of interaction with different actors – particularly school principals, school teachers, and representatives of AF. We demonstrated that different actors often impose pressures on brokers to translate spirituality in a specific way, which reflects – for example – their identities as organization members, their core values, and their interests. For instance, ideas echoed across our data, through both the AF guidelines and the mandatory school requirement that admitted programs should possess structure, content, rationale, and other practices that underline the importance attributed to professionalism. Furthermore, in both phases of data collection, the widespread ‘tools’ metaphor used by schoolteachers, school principals, and the self-spirituality brokers themselves reflected the genuine nature of instrumentalism in spirituality as constructed by all actors.

Similar results, denoting how the translation of self-spirituality involves the positions and values of different organizational and non-organizational actors, can be seen in other studies. It has been noted that managers in for-profit organizations (like other actors, such as school principals, school teachers, and parents) are often involved in the translation process (Karjalainen et al., 2018; Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni, 2011). In other words, we argue that to some degree, the translation of self-spirituality into mainstream organizations reflects not only the core ideas of this culture, but also the values and perspectives of the other organizational actors involved in the process. Indeed, in numerous Israeli settings where people experience or consume self-spirituality practices (yoga and meditation, for example) outside the context of their work organizations, the presentation of these practices can be significantly different. It may include, for instance, a discourse and practices related to notions that explicitly represent certain core ideas of self-spirituality culture, such as enlightenment.

In summary, based on knowledge from research into the translation of cultural concepts, the empirical data show that self-spirituality is modeled in a specific direction, that is, instrumentalism, as is suggested by existing research; but, it also identifies the interactional dynamics that explain the emergence of this particular direction taken in the translation of self-spirituality into organizations. We have demonstrated that when brokers translate new ideas, they must consider the values and interests of the actors who are involved in the process. Our study shows (as do others) that instrumentalism is a core value in Western organizations.

Finally, another contribution of this study is in showing that institutional contexts (in our case, for-profit and non-profit organizations, including the interests and ideologies that they represent) shape the discursive meanings of self-spirituality in significant ways. It implies that focusing on the discourse of self-spirituality, without reference to the particular institutional contexts in which it is enacted, is not sufficient and in fact might be misleading.

Future research should further investigate under what ‘structures’, conditions and ‘brokers work’ self-spirituality has been successfully institutionalized in mainstream organizations.