1

The role of spiritual leadership in fostering inclusive workplaces

George Gotsis and Aikaterini Grimani 2017.The role of spiritual

leadership in fostering inclusive workplaces. Personnel Review Vol.46

No.5, pp. 908-935.

Purpose: Inclusion is of critical importance to creating healthier workplaces, taken for

granted the ongoing dynamic of workforce diversity. The paper is intended to designate the

role of spiritual leadership in fostering more humane and inclusive workplaces.

Design/methodology/approach: We review the extant literature on two distinct

research streams, inclusion and inclusive leadership, and spiritual leadership, elaborate a

mediation model, identify antecedents and outcomes, and articulate a set of propositions

reflecting key findings.

Findings: We advance a conceptual model according to which inclusive practices

founded on spiritual values will mediate the positive relationship between spiritual leadership

and a climate for inclusion.We argue that calling and membership as components of spiritual

well-being will reinforce employees’ experience of both uniqueness and belongingness, thus

affecting their perceptions of inclusion and inducing multi-level beneficial outcomes.

Implications for practice: Spiritual leadership assumes a preeminent role in

embracing and valuing diversity: it embodies a potential for positioning inclusive ideals more

strategically, in view of enabling employees unfold their genuine selves and experience

integration in work settings.

Social implications: Spiritual leadership helps inclusive goals to be situated in their

societal context; inclusion is thus viewed as both an organizational and societal good,

embedded in social contexts, and pertinent to corporate vision, mission and philosophy.

Originality/value: The paper examines spiritual leadership as a predictor of climates

for inclusion. Drawing on spiritual values, spiritual leaders display a strong potential for

inclusion, facilitating diverse employees to experience feelings of both belongingness and

uniqueness in work settings that assume high societal relevance.

2

Contemporary organizations necessitate voluntary initiatives designed to generate a

process of inclusion of employees from different backgrounds to their formal and informal

structures.The rationale behind these initiatives remains the empowerment of unprivileged

groups and individuals so as to be effectively involved in organizational processes, as well

as a deeper intergroup understanding of different social identities, values and belief-

systems. Diversity strategies aim at fostering the ideal of an inclusive workplace, a work

environment in which diverse employees are afforded the opportunity to achieve their innate

potential through participating in all aspects of organizational life (Da Rocha,2009).

Despite the scholarly emphasis on leadership and diversity (e.g. Chin,2010), the issue of

integrating inclusion and leadership literatures, has remained relatively unexplored in the

organizational sciences. The issue of employing leadership theories in general and spiritual

leadership in particular, as a potential predictor of climates for inclusion, has not yet received

due attention in the respective literature. More specifically, organizational research has not

adequately explored the mechanisms through which a spiritual leader will engage in

behaviors that accommodate fragmented narratives and reconcile competing aspects of

diverse employees’ selves. The study is intended to fill this gap, by placing an emphasis on

the importance of spiritual leadership for managing differences on a more humane basis. To

address the aforementioned issues, we develop an integrated framework by underscoring

spiritual leadership potential for supporting inclusive practices that may in turn help climates

for inclusion to thrive. We argue that spiritual leaders draw on spiritual values to display

inclusive behaviors and promote inclusive practices that mediate the positive relationship

between spiritual leadership and inclusive climates. A spiritual leader is expected to cultivate

followers’ capabilities, allow workplace integration of identity groups, as well as harmonize

multiple, intersecting and stigmatized identities, no more considered an impediment to

personal fulfillment and career advancement.

The paper is structured as follows: we begin our theoretical examination by reviewing

extant literature on workplace inclusion and inclusive leadership on one hand, and spiritual

leadership on the other. We proceed to advance an integrative framework of spiritual

leadership and inclusion, by formulating a set of propositions that capture the importance of

mediating variables, as well as of both proximal and distal outcomes of spiritual leaders’

inclusiveness. Theoretical and practical implications, contributions to leadership literature,

as well as recommendations for future research are identified and thoroughly discussed.

3

Inclusion and inclusive leadership in a diverse work setting

Streams of literature on workplace inclusion

Inclusion is a multifaceted construct (Farndale et al.,2015; Sabharwal, 2014). Mor Barak

(2011, p.253) defines an inclusive workplace as one that:

“…values and utilizes individual and intergroup differences within the workforce,

cooperates with, and contributes to, its surrounding community, alleviates the needs of

disadvantaged groups in its wider national environment, and collaborates with individuals,

groups and organizations across national and cultural boundaries”.

Inclusion denotes “the removal of obstacles to the full participation and contribution of

employees in organizations” (Roberson, 2006, p.217). Inclusion may be confounded with

diversity, fact that makes Roberson (2006) suggest a demarcation between diversity and

inclusion and theorize inclusion as a distinctive approach to diversity management, the

determinants and outcomes of which deserve further consideration. In terms of conceptual

distinctiveness, inclusion is reflective of “the way an organization configures its systems and

structures to value and leverage the potential, and to limit the disadvantages, of differences”

(Roberson, 2006, p.221). In sum, diversity primarily refers to differences underlying the

demographic composition of groups or organizations, whereas inclusion indicates

organizational objectives designed to increase the participation of all employees, as well as

to leverage diversity effects on the organization (Roberson, 2006, p.219).

The construct has undergone a conceptual shift, evolving from a regulative pattern of

antidiscrimination discourse to a more business-oriented concept. Mor Barak (2015, pp.85-

86) advocates a two stage process model of inclusion: in the first, reactive stage

organizations seek to increase demographic representation in the workplace, whereas in the

second, proactive stage they invest in diversity initiatives aiming at enhancing inclusion.

Other contributions employ a more strategic, relational approach designed to yield inclusive

cultures (Chavez and Weisinger, 2008), or advance an institutionalist framework, according

to which regulative, normative and cognitive elements constitute the underlying mechanisms

of inclusion process that in turn generates multilevel beneficial outcomes (Theodorakopoulos

and Budhwar,2015). In either cases, a shift in organizational priorities necessitates cultural

and attitudinal transformations aiming at managing for diversity, intended to integrate

unique aspects of global workplaces.

4

Interestingly, inclusion has been theorized as a two dimensional construct. Shore et al.

(2011) elaborated an inclusion framework that embodies two primary dimensions,

belongingness and uniqueness that have to be considered jointly to advance scholarly

research in the area of diversity: a singular focus on one dimension results in dysfunctional

effects for diverse employees and organizations. Emphasis on belongingness, to the

detriment of employees’ uniqueness, induces assimilation according to which one is treated

as an insider in a workgroup on the grounds of her/his conformity to dominant norms. On

the contrary, high emphasis attributed to uniqueness entails multiple forms of segregation

according to which one’s unique attributes are viewed as conducive to group success, albeit

she/he is not treated as an insider in the work team. Failure to concurrently value both of

these dimensions entails a state of exclusion that undermines interventions that treat

minorities as worthy of equal dignity and respect, and encourage them to retain their unique

attributes within a work setting. Conceivably, inclusion denotes “the degree to which an

employee perceives that he or she is an esteemed member of the work group through

experiencing treatment that satisfies his or her needs for belongingness and

uniqueness”(Shore et al.,2011, p.1265).Drawing on this framework, we infer that inclusion

refers to “how organizations, groups, their leaders, and their members provide ways that

allow everyone, across multiple types of differences, to participate, contribute, have a voice,

and feel that they are connected and belong, all without losing individual uniqueness or

having to give up valuable identities or aspects of themselves” (Ferdman, 2014, p.12).

Shore et al.(2011) identify antecedents and outcomes of inclusion. In so doing, they argue

that antecedents (inclusive climate, leadership and inclusive practices) help emerge the

group processes that shape inclusive work environments. More specifically, inclusive

climates (involving fair employment practices, integration of diverse employees and diversity

climates), inclusive leadership (embodying philosophies valuing diversity, as well as

procedurally fair treatment) and inclusive practices (participative decision-making, freedom

from stereotyping,conflict resolution procedures) contribute to fostering employee

perceptions of inclusion that in turn generate beneficial outcomes (high quality LMX and

group members’ relationships, higher levels of job satisfaction and lower levels of turnover

intentions, enhanced organizational commitment and citizenship behaviors, psychological

well-being, and prospects of career advancement for diverse employees).

5

Rationales for establishing climates for inclusion:

As already argued, inclusive climate, inclusive leadership and inclusive practices are

integral parts of the inclusion process. Nishii and Rich (2014) conceptualize inclusive climates

as encompassing three primary dimensions: organizational practices, interactions among

employees, and objective characteristics of a work setting. They then identify activities that

strengthen a climate for inclusion: assess inclusiveness of climate, examine fairness of

employment practices, create opportunities for employees to share whole selves, and

implement mechanisms for increasing inclusion in decision making (Nishii and Rich,

2014,p.355). Groggins and Ryan (2013) exemplify the premises on which a strong climate

for inclusion should be based: respect for differences culminates into learning from others’

beliefs, a continuous process that informs efficacy for improvement. In addition, an inclusive

workplace reinforces objective and subjective person-work environment fit: openness to and

appreciation of diversity remain two critical components of a pro-diversity and

concomitantly, inclusive climate (Daya and April,2014; Hofhuis et al., 2012).

A body of research concerned with inclusive climates in organizational contexts focuses

on the importance of these climates to alleviating those who experience the pernicious

effects of discrimination. A climate for inclusion is expected to facilitate employee well-being,

but primarily to allow for integration of differences and alleviate employees’ identity concerns

(the respective needs for belongingness and distinctiveness, as well as uncertainty

reduction). Inclusion is in a position to mitigate the detrimental effects of persistent group

level inequalities because it induces work climates in which employees’ perceptions of fair

treatment are related to empowerment and self-efficacy beliefs (Guillaume et al., 2014). For

example, Andrews and Ashworth (2015) found that minority ethnic and gender

representativeness were related to an inclusive work climate: each aspect of

representativeness was associating with stronger perceptions of inclusion and lower levels

of discrimination and bullying. Furthermore, it is plausible to argue that in these climates

coworkers are more prone to resolve tensions rather than engage in conflict and other,

disruptive forms of antagonism that undermine work-group morale (eg. Nishii, 2013).

Equally importantly, it is reasonable to assume that employees are afforded greater

opportunities to contribute to within-group dynamics insofar as inclusive climates foster the

engagement of entire selves and facilitate the integration and personalized expression of

multiple identities through inclusive leadership, as we briefly discuss in the following.

6

Inclusive leadership: Rationales for leader inclusiveness

Inclusive leadership is germane to fostering employees’ perceptions of inclusion. For

example, research on diversity leadership highlights the importance of leader inclusiveness

in empowering followers (Eagly and Chin,2010; Ng,2008; Susmita and Myra, 2013).

Gallegos (2014) conceptualizes inclusive leadership as a relational construct enacted at

various levels (individual, relational and systemic) that expands on compassion skills to

foster deeper relationships, model courage and embrace a profound sense of humanity.

Inclusive leadership is defined as “an ongoing cycle of learning through collaborative and

respectful relational practice that enables individuals and collectives to be fully part of the

whole, such that they are directed, aligned, and committed toward shared outcomes, for the

common good of all, while retaining a sense of authenticity and uniqueness” (Booysen, 2014:

306).Inclusive leadership development comprises inclusive cultures institutionalized through

practices, systems and processes, as well as a climate of respect, equality and fairness that

create a safe learning and working environment (Booysen, 2014,p. 311).

Inclusive leadership is dynamic and change-oriented, enables intercultural encounters, is

broadly applicable to diverse situations, and advocates an explicit stance on ethics and

virtues. Moreover, inclusive leadership presupposes a substantial shift from cultures of

individuality to collectivism, from isolation to collaboration and from competition to mutuality

that facilitate relatedness, sense-making and creativity. Underlying a people-oriented,

humane approach is an ethical framework founded on a renewed conception of the virtues

of integrity, humbleness, and engagement that reflect a deeper commitment to critical

reflection, adjustment, and change (Wuffli, 2016).

Extant literature on inclusive leadership highlights its importance in generating beneficial

outcomes. For example, Carmeli et al.(2010) found that inclusive leadership was positively

related to psychological safety, which in turn engendered employee involvement in creative

tasks.Leaders displaying higher levels of inclusiveness were effective in cultivating

psychological safety facilitating group learning, thereby enhancing team performance (Hirak

et al.,2012).. Furthermore, leader inclusiveness is in a position to lessen perceived status

inequality by mitigating the negative effect of compositional diversity (Mitchell et al.,2015).

Taken for granted that policies yielding inclusive climates depend on the type of inclusive

leadership, we turn to discuss the relevance of certain leadership styles to inclusive goals

and more specifically, to influencing followers’ expectations of inclusion.

7

Leadership theories and inclusion:Empirical research on the effect of various leadership

styles on followers’ perceptions of inclusion helps to capture the relevance of a particular

leadership style to the objective of promoting inclusion. Among the extant literature, leader-

member exchange for instance, has been found to positively influence inclusiveness

climates. Drawing from distinct theoretical streams (social categorization, LMX and

expectation states theories) Nishii and Mayer (2009) focused on group-level LMX as

moderating the relationship between demographic diversity and group turnover. Findings

lent support to the research hypotheses, especially that managers were effective in

influencing inclusion differentials in conformity to the pattern of leader-member exchange

they espoused, attenuating the positive relationship between diversity and turnover in the

cases LMX mean was higher, or LMX differentiation was lower.

Situational leadership is also considered as exerting a positive effect on employee

perceptions of inclusion. In analyzing empirical data derived from a major firm committed

to diversity, Jonsson et al.(2014) explored constructions of otherness by virtue of the inferior

positioning of diverse employees in organizational hierarchies: they identified two principal

dimensions of situational leadership, a supporting and coaching style based on personal

development and more akin to inclusion, and an instructive one that was far from

encouraging personal growth of both leaders and subordinates.

Transformational leadership is invested with a similar potential for inclusion. Ashikali and

Groeneveld (2015) found that transformational leadership mediated the relationship

between diversity initiatives and outcomes by significantly contributing to the inclusiveness

of the organizational culture, thus in turn enhancing employees’ affective commitment.

Transformational leadership has been also found to affect vocational inclusion of disabled

employees (Kensbock and Boehm, 2016).

Among various new genre leadership theories, authentic leadership embodies a strong

potential for inclusion. Cottrill et al.(2014) examined authentic leadership as an antecedent

of inclusion by collecting data from 107 primary and 219 peer participants in various US

industries. Findings demonstrated that authentic leaders significantly facilitated employee’s

perceptions of inclusion, helping them experience higher levels of self-worth as valued

organizational members. Authentic leaders were effective in building an environment that

not only allowed for enhanced organization-based self-esteem, but also encouraged diverse

employees to engage in organizational citizenship and other pro-social behaviors.

8

Despite the widely held importance of inclusive leadership in shaping multi-level beneficial

outcomes, there is still a paucity of research on elaborating coherent and integrative

conceptual frameworks of particular leadership styles and inclusion. To our knowledge,

authentic leadership remains one notable exception in suggesting fruitful ways to expand on

this perspective. Boekhorst (2015) for instance argues that authentic leaders are

instrumental in conveying expectations for inclusive behaviors through inclusive leader role

modeling, thereby fostering employees’ perceptions of inclusion. Through both social

information processing and role modeling inclusive conduct, leaders help their followers

appreciate the value of differences and behave in an inclusive manner. Furthermore,

contextual factors (reward systems, group composition, size and goal interdependence) are

expected to influence followers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors. Servant leadership

has been also theorized as supportive of strategies intended to forge an organizational

culture of inclusion that reinforces participation and ameliorates intercultural encounters in

cross-cultural workplaces (Whitfield, 2014).

Unexpectedly, although a number of studies have investigated relationships between

leadership style and inclusion, spiritual leadership remains somewhat absent from

consideration. Spiritual leadership involves both a sense of vocation and an experience of

interconnectedness among followers: these two components of spiritual leadership can make

a difference in strengthening employees’ perceptions of inclusion to a greater extent than

other, more conventional leadership styles. Spiritual leadership is situated at the intersection

between two related streams of research, workplace spirituality and transcendental

leadership, which are both inclusive in nature: by reflecting a shared transcendent vision of

service to multiple social actors, by fostering a sense of community, by affirming uniqueness

of, and ultimately by granting equal dignity and respect to all employees. We thus turn into

a more thorough discussion of the underlying reasons that help justify such an intuitive

belief.

Spiritual leadership: conceptual underpinnings

Inaugurating an inclusive philosophy through workplace spirituality

Spiritual leadership is an emerging leadership paradigm situated within the broader

context of workplace spirituality and transcendental leadership streams of research. Fry

(2008, p.107) posits that both “workplace spirituality and spiritual leadership must therefore

9

be comprehended within a holistic or system context of interwoven cultural and spiritual

values”. The construct of spirituality involves three interrelated, yet distinct factors,

interconnection with a higher power, interconnection with human beings, and

interconnection with the natural environment: this three-dimensional model encapsulates

societal connotations pertaining to operationalizing inclusion (cf, Liu and Robertson, 2011).

Lips-Wiersma and Mills (2014) demonstrated that bringing one’s entire self at work is

inseparable from human connectivity, a process of recognizing common humanity through

discussing deeper meanings of existence. Workplace spirituality as an-articulated system of

beliefs in a higher purpose centred on the possibility of self-transcendence, deepening

connectedness, personal growth and well-being entails beneficial employee outcomes (e.g.

Dent et al.,2005; Duchon and Plowman,2005; Giacalone. and Jurkiewicz, 2003; McKee et

al.,2011). Lee et al.(2014) posit that organizations in which integrity, humanism, respect

and ethical climates thrive, buffer the negative effects of emotional labor via such beneficial

outcomes.

Worthy to note is the vital role of workplace spirituality as an overarching context

supportive of, and necessary for institutionalizing inclusion. Spirituality in business is in a

position to give a new impetus to diversity considerations in many significant respects.

Spirituality and religion are considered a resource among other types of diversity, fact that

necessitates managerial philosophies and effective implementation of strategic practices to

foster this form of workplace diversity (Miller and Ewest,2015). Schaeffer and Mattis (2012)

consider religiosity and spirituality as such landscapes of diversity and indicate potential

ways through which individuals and organizations assimilate spirituality in view of coping

with, engaging or obscuring the complex intertwinements of subjectivities, personal

narratives, and structures of dominance and power. König (2010) argues that the joint

implementation of spiritual practices and diversity initiatives exerts a synergistic effect on

developing a new sensitivity towards alterity, as well as openness towards uniqueness of the

other. Spiritual practices, such as meditation and reflection, inaugurate a safe space in

organizations in which people feel that their uniqueness is valued by exploring and

appreciating the meanings of diversity and otherness. Workplace spirituality, dependent

upon the interaction between personal and situational factors (Vallabh and Singhal,2014)

allows for such inclusive forms of leadership development (Weinberg and Locander,2014)

and career advancement (Duffy et al.,2010).

10

Moreover, workplace spirituality embodies the dimension of community that is akin to an

experience of employee interconnectedness, as well as reminiscent of belongingness in the

inclusion literature. Ashmos and Duchon (2000, pp.136-137) place an emphasis on this

sense of community to underscore the need for connectedness to other human beings, an

essential element of spiritual development. In this view, “leaders have a responsibility for

nurturing the spirit by helping their subordinates be open to their inner lives, by helping

them find meaning in their work, and by strengthening a sense of community in the

workplace” (Duchon and Plowman, 2005, p.828). Saks (2011) argues that the three main

dimensions of spirituality (transcendence, community and spiritual values) yield

meaningfulness at work and employee engagement. Gupta et al. (2014) found that

organizational values and a sense of community as two dimensions of workplace spirituality

significantly influenced employee job-satisfaction. Work teams with a stronger sense of

community and meaningful work as two components of workplace spirituality enjoyed higher

levels of organizational performance (Albuquerque et al., 2014).

Spiritual leadership: conceptual distinctiveness

Spiritual leadership has been conceptualized as a relational form of leadership through an

ongoing theoretical development. Among various approaches employed to this purpose (eg.

Benefiel,2005; Parameshwar,2005), Fry’s (2003) initial model was grounded in an intrinsic

motivation framework articulated through the dimensions of vision, hope/faith and altruistic

love on one hand, and subjective well-being (calling and membership) on the other.The

model was extended to areas of character and positive psychology as akin to ethical well-

being and ultimately, to sustainability and CSR agendas (Fry, 2005a).

Fry (2003) contends that spiritual leadership is invested with a strong potential to add to

the leadership attributes of other leadership theories by placing an emphasis on a sense of

calling on the part of leaders and followers, as well as on the creation of organizational

cultures grounded in altruistic love whereby leaders and followers manifest genuine care,

concern, and appreciation for both self and others. Fry (2005b) defines spiritual leadership

as comprising the values, attitudes and behaviors that are integral to an endeavor of

intrinsically motivating self and others to enhance experiences of spiritual survival through

calling and membership. Fry’s (2008) revised model encompasses inner life exemplified

through individual practices embedded in organizational contexts that positively influence

11

hope and faith in a transcendent vision of service to key stakeholders, in congruence with

the values of altruistic love (Benefiel et al.,2014, p.178). Both leaders and followers that

cultivate an inner life will be more prone to develop such hope and faith, as well as values

that facilitate experiences of spiritual well-being through calling and membership (Benefiel

et al.,2014, p.179). Spiritual leadership involves two distinct, yet interrelated processes:

a) creating a transcendent vision of service to others culminating in an experience of a

sense of calling substantiated in meaningfulness and purposefulness in life, and

b) establishing or reinforcing an organizational culture founded on the values of altruistic

love that shape a sense of membership through which one feels appreciated and understood,

and displays genuine care, concern and appreciation for both self and others.

The development of spiritual leadership as both an analytical construct and a particular

perspective that informs organizational practices, is situated among existing leadership

theories, in particular those that are values-based, such as transformational and servant

leadership (Crossman, 2010). This fact necessitates further elaboration on the conceptual

demarcations between spiritual leadership theory and authentic, ethical and servant

leadership constructs (Fry, 2008,p.115). Fry (2009) distinguishes between spiritual and

servant leadership on one hand, and transformational, charismatic, authentic and ethical

leadership on the other. In this respect, the theory of spiritual leadership shares strong

commonalities with values-based, servant or inspired leadership concepts and should not be

viewed as contradicting these leadership models.

Spiritual leadership theory is intertwined with recent developments in the respective fields

of workplace spirituality, positive psychology and character ethics. Benefiel (2005) for

instance, underscores the need for a more robust and sophisticated approach to the spiritual

aspect of spiritual leadership: in her view, the study of spiritual leadership can be deepened

and enriched through a more nuanced understanding of spirituality based on a conceptual

framework for understanding both the leader’s and the organization’s spiritual

transformation. Dent et al. (2005) explored the nexus between spirituality and leadership

as two interrelated constructs and advocate a more comprehensive, integrated leadership

theory that encompasses the spiritual, emotional, cognitive, social and physical aspects of

leader development. In another vein of reasoning, Fry (2009) views spiritual leadership as

a higher form of being-centered leadership that substantiates these internal processes,

altruistic values, and ensuing attitudes pertinent to positive human well-being.

12

To summarize, spiritual leadership theory encompasses three distinct parts, leader

principles and behaviors, follower needs for spiritual well-being, and organizational

outcomes, all of which incorporate a potential for significantly expanding inclusive leadership

prospects. First and foremost, a culture of altruistic love as a quality of leader principles

manifested through compassion, integrity and trust generates an experience of wholeness

and harmony for organizational members. Second, calling and membership as primary

dimensions of spiritual well-being inform meaningful and purposeful activities that reflect a

sense of interconnectedness, of being understood and appreciated. And third, the

combination of leader principles and member spiritual needs fulfillment yields multi-level

individual and organizational outcomes (Madison and Kellermanns, 2013, p. 163). Findings

derived from empirical research on a wide range of spiritual leadership content domains lent

sufficient support to these predictions (Chen and Yang,2012; Chen et al.,2012; Fry and

Cohen,2009; Fry and Nisiewicz,2013; Fry and Slocum,2008; Fry et al.,2005; Jeon et

al.,2013; Pawar,2014).

In the following section, we argue that the deepening awareness of the spiritual

dimensions of humanity allows for an interconnectedness of all people that reframes and

mitigates social demarcations. Enacting spiritual values through character development

enhances leadership effectiveness in ways beneficial to all group members (Arnetz et

al.,2013; Driscoll and McKee,2007; Ferguson and Milliman,2008; Sweeney and Fry,2012).

More specifically, spiritual leaders are invested with a capacity to facilitate meaningful

activities that are reminiscent of a higher purpose in life, foster positive emotions and display

genuine concern for their followers, making them experience feelings of self-worthiness.

Followers are thus inclined to internalize beliefs in the intrinsic value of every human person,

culminating in feelings of self-worth, as well as in a sense of community that is inclusive in

nature, and transcends rigid social categorization processes. In this respect, spiritual

leadership principles and behaviors will meet follower needs for spiritual well-being, a

process that is germane to shaping employees’ perceptions of inclusion, as we demonstrate

in the following.

An integrative framework of spiritual leadership and inclusion

In the preceding sections we reviewed extant literature on inclusion and inclusive

leadership on one hand, and spiritual leadership on the other. In this section, we continue

13

by elaborating a conceptual framework that highlights the processes through which spiritual

leadership is supportive of the ensuing inclusive climates (see, Figure 1). More specifically,

we provide a synthesis of the extant literatures on spiritual leadership and inclusion by

resorting to Shore’s et al.(2011) two-dimensional model and articulating a set of propositions

to this purpose. We posit that spiritual leadership is in nature inclusive: it incorporates other-

orientated values that may in turn be viewed as foundations of inclusive practices. We

identify inclusive practices as the key mediating variable that intervenes in the indirect

relationship between spiritual leadership and climates for inclusion. We argue that

employees’ perceptions of calling and membership as core dimensions of spiritual well-being,

are expected to anticipate the needs for uniqueness and belongingness underscored in

Shore’s et al.(2011) inclusion framework. We then suggest that inclusive practices initiated

through spiritual leadership are expected to yield beneficial outcomes for employees,

organizations and communities in general.

(INSERT FIGURE ONE ABOUT HERE)

As already noted, spiritual leadership encompasses the dimension of self-transcendence

as intrinsically associated with a profound sense of connectedness with others. Spiritual

leadership involves the deeper awareness of the interdependence of humanity which helps

to reframe social boundaries in a more inclusive manner. In a highly diversified workforce,

the diverse other may be perceived as representing a potential threat to the dominant

identities, due to social categorization processes separating “us” from “others” (Petriglieri,

2011). A spiritual leader is expected to act in a way that mitigates the detrimental effects of

social stereotyping processes, as well as bridges the divide between in-group and out-group

members originating in competing social identities. Most importantly, spiritual leadership is

enacted in ways reflective of and commensurate with a set of underlying values that are not

only critical to leadership effectiveness, but also serve as a basis of adopting a more humane

treatment of diverse others. The spiritual leader’s vision of service to multiple (corporate

and societal) stakeholders in particular, entrenched in values of altruistic love, facilitates

her/his ability to enable employees experience calling and membership that in turn predict

perceptions of uniqueness and belongingness respectively, in conformity to Shore’s et

al.(2011) definition of inclusion. We thus suggest that:

P1: Spiritual leadership will be positively associated with workgroup climates for inclusion.

14

Spiritual leadership and inclusive practices

We have so far underscored the centrality of spiritual leadership to enhancing followers’

well-being through a sense of membership in and belongingness to a cohesive community

that is highly respectful of personal biographies, individualized narratives and social

identities. In addition, the experience of calling according to which work has an intrinsic

meaning will be reinforced by practices denoting that every employee, irrespective of

demographic attributes, can make a difference through her/his specific contribution to

attaining shared goals. A spiritual leader is not only more likely to be supportive of

organizationally sanctioned inclusive procedures, but she/he is expected to act as role model

of inclusive behaviors that motivate followers accordingly. Tentatively, inclusive practices

are more than being contingent on the leadership development process, because of the

spiritual leadership’s potential of instilling new meanings into the needs for belongingness

and uniqueness through membership and calling, respectively.

Inclusive practices: Inclusion emerges as the corollary of a set of practices aiming at

encouraging alternate forms of pro-social voice of groups inhibited by silence climates that

dominate organizational life (cf, Bell et al.,2011). Inclusion can be conceived of as “a

practice-an interacting set of structures, values, norms, group and organizational climates,

and individual and collective behaviors, all connected with inclusion experiences in a

mutually reinforcing and dynamic system” (Ferdman, 2014, p.16). Tang et al.(2015)

identified seven factors of inclusive practices in a Chinese context: inclusive framework,

inclusive communication, inclusive decision-making, fair treatment, inclusive leadership,

tolerance, and inclusive adaptation. Inclusive leadership in particular, may be viewed as

providing the underpinnings for the implementation of inclusive practices.

Among other transcendental leadership styles, spiritual leadership is expected to promote

inclusive practices through leader behaviors grounded in altruistic values. Followers will thus

experience spiritual well-being through calling and membership, being empowered to bring

their whole selves to a work environment of dignity and respect, fact that amounts to feelings

of inclusion, as briefly discussed. More specifically, spiritual leaders will display inclusive

behaviors such as showing respect and empathy, appreciating different voices, encouraging

open and frank communication, and cultivating participative decision-making and problem

solving. Spiritual leadership styles can enhance those managerial dispositions that support

15

a culture of inclusion, referred to by Lirio et al.(2008,p.456): identifying and empathizing

with employees, valuing work-life balance, diversity and inclusiveness, showing openness to

experimentation, and adapting workplace norms and operations. We turn to demonstrate

the role of spiritual values, one of spiritual leadership’s constituents, to fostering inclusive

practices across all organizational levels.

Spiritual values as vehicles for implementing inclusive practices: As denoted earlier,

universally held values of altruistic love are integral to spiritual leadership’s definitions.

Reave (2005) places an emphasis on the spiritual values of integrity, honesty and humility

as germane to leadership effectiveness and sustainability. On the contrary, the qualities of

ineffective leaders are opposing the spiritual values of integrity and humility, and they are

not consistent with the practices of treating others with respect, compassion and

appreciation (Reave, 2005, p.664). Reave convincingly argues that the spiritual practices of

demonstrating respect for others’ values, displaying fair treatment, expressing caring and

concern, listening responsively, appreciating the contribution of others, and engaging in

personal reflection, are anchored in this set of spiritual values. Ultimately, there is no

discrepancy, but a clear consistency “between the values and practices endorsed for spiritual

success and those required for leadership success” (Reave, 2005, p.681).

Spiritual values permeate operationalization of spiritual leadership, influencing leadership

perspectives, behaviors and approaches to followers (Fairholm and Gronau, 2015). Brophy

(2015) advocates incorporating spiritual values into business management not so much of

instrumental benefits, as of their potential for reflecting on humanity’s deepest aspirations;

failure in so doing threatens to alienate corporate stakeholders from their moral integrity.

The exclusion of shared spiritual values such as compassion, interconnection, human dignity,

transcendence and profundity, from business agendas, threatens to alienate organizational

principals from their moral integrity (Brophy 2015, pp.788-789). In sum, shared spiritual

values are inclusive in nature: they may be deemed as pivotal to the endeavor of managing

spiritual diversity, as well as to the design of inclusiveness strategies in organizations

(Crossman, 2015).

Fry (2005a, pp.65-67) adduces a comprehensive list of values of altruistic love that

motivate behaviors conducive to ethical and spiritual well-being. This set encompasses the

values of trust, forgiveness/acceptance/gratitude, integrity, honesty, courage, humility,

kindness, compassion, and meekness/endurance. Among major spiritual values, compassion

16

is vital to perceiving the needs of others and to alleviate suffering experienced by vulnerable

groups. Recent scholarship on care and compassion in work settings has indicated that an

organizational capacity for compassion emerges as an organization internalizes altruistic

values and incorporates them into its structure and culture, thus initiating compassionate

responding to pain triggers (Lawrence and Maitlis, 2012). An ethic of care enacted in team

narrative practices and embedded in enduring relationships recognizes that vulnerability is

ubiquitous, deeply entrenched in social contexts. Compassionate responses to others’

suffering “are more likely to occur in organizations with structures that foster integration,

with cultures that nurture trust and respect the emotional lives of members, and where

members have the opportunity to become competent carers”(Madden et al.,2012, p.656;

see Dutton et al.,2014 for a review).A spiritual leader displays genuine care for her/his

subordinates, as argued earlier.

Forgiveness places an emphasis on the acceptance of otherness, by eliminating

impediments to constructive interactions (Fehr and Gelfand,2012). Humility is germane to

efforts aiming at interpersonal contact as well as to seeing value in others’ perspectives, by

helping them grow and thrive (Morris et al.,2005; Owens and Hekman,2012). Trust informs

relationships based on mutual understanding, and kindness is in a position to enhance more

considerate attitudes. Finally, meekness/endurance is integral to effective conflict resolution,

and courage helps individual to prevail in the face of threat and extreme adversity. This set

of spiritual values exhibited by spiritual leaders are anchored in practices that empower

employees to unfold their true selves in work settings, enhance equity perceptions of

minority groups, enable participation through pro-active voice, ensure effective conflict

resolution and engagement with resistance, foster frank interactions between identity groups

and underscore the societal embeddedness of inclusive goals. Spiritual leadership will be

supportive of empowering practices that restore the unity of employees’ intersecting

identities and encourage them to cultivate their innate potential. Equally importantly,

spiritual leadership will nurture equitable practices signaling that the organization treats

diverse employees as human persons enjoying equal dignity and respect. Concomitantly,

spiritual leaders have an innate potential to support a wide range of inclusive practices. We

thus posit that:

P2a: Spiritual leadership is expected to be supportive of empowering practices

P2b: Spiritual leadership is expected to nurture equitable practices

17

P2c: Spiritual leadership will facilitate employees’ participation in decision-making

processes

P2d: Spiritual leadership is expected to inform constructive conflict resolution procedures

P2e: Spiritual leadership is expected to encourage diversity training through an

appreciation of diverse identities.

Inclusive practices and climates for inclusion

Extant literature has demonstrated the role of inclusive practices in shaping employees’

perceptions of inclusive climates. For instance, Boehm et al. (2014) elaborated an integrated

model that specifies the mechanisms through which age-inclusive practices influenced

diversity climate perceptions, in particular through processes of collective sense-making.

Nishii et al.(2008) underscore that employees make attributions about the ‘why’ of HR

practices which are differentially associated with attitudes. Findings confirm the hypothesis

according to which the attribution that HR practices are motivated by organizational concern

to enhance employee well-being was positively related to employee attitudes. Not

unexpectedly, the attribution centered on reducing costs and exploiting employees was

negatively associated with attitudes, while external attributions involving compliance with

union policies were not significantly related to work attitudes. In sum, employees’ shared

perceptions of the underlying reasons for adopting a bundle of HR practices contributed to

attaining varied ends (Nishii et al.,2008, p.528).

These remarks apply to work settings in which employees shape their attributions about

the rationales for inclusive practices on the basis of an explicit concern for their well-being,

in particular when they perceive an alignment between these practices and their leaders’

values. Guillaume et al.(2014) posit that inclusive practices reinforced through transactional

and transformational leadership indirectly favor climates for inclusion: integration of

employees’ differences, equitable employment practices and empowerment to participate in

decision-making processes, are deemed work-group and organizational level antecedents of

climates for inclusion. Equally importantly, societal and institutional factors shape inclusive

practices contingent on top management diversity beliefs.

Spiritual leadership generates equitable practices that not only motivate followers to resist

marginalization stemming from power and status differentials, but also help them to

experience enhanced well-being, because they perceive that their unique attributes do not

18

pose substantial problems to workplace integration. We argue that a sense of calling

embodied in spiritual well-being addresses the need for uniqueness of diverse employees,

just as the second component of spiritual well-being, the experience of membership in a

work community underlies the need for belongingness, the other dimension of a climate for

inclusion in Shore et al’s (2011) model. Accordingly, identity groups feel appreciated in

settings in which inclusive practices grounded in altruistic love, prevail.

Inclusive practices are inextricably congruent with value-systems that elevate humanity

to a core issue of climates for inclusion. From a spiritual leadership perspective, altruistic

love as a value-system comprises a sense of wholeness, harmony and well-being anchored

in care, concern and appreciation for both self and others. Deepening the spirit-work

connection is related to a process of recognizing the core dimensions of humanity in dignity

and spirituality: accordingly, we are in need of bundle of practices that will not only facilitate

meaningful work and respect, but will also secure equality of opportunity, pro-active voice,

health and safety, and equity and fairness in working conditions (Bolton, 2010). Equally

importantly, higher levels of interactional justice prompted by spiritual leaders will affect

employees’ experience of respectful treatment as a precursor of a climate for inclusion. In

these environments, identity concerns of unprivileged groups are addressed: spiritual

leadership’s emphasis on membership and connectedness meets the need for belongingness

and mitigates the divisive role of strong sub-group faultlines (see Chrobot Mason et al.,2009

on the disrupting effects of various triggers). The respective needs of distinctiveness and

uniqueness are also fulfilled, insofar as followers’ perceptions of calling encourage them to

unfold their authentic selves, thus shaping positive identities within a work team.Last, but

not least, uncertainty reduction emerges as a corollary of constructive conflict resolution,

initiated by spiritual leaders’ endeavor to restore social harmony and to inclusively reframe

encounters between dissimilar others.: On these grounds we plausibly infer that inclusive

practices reinforced by spiritual values will affect employees’ thriving, thus being positively

evaluated by them. We thus suggest:

P3a: A spiritual leader’s inclusive practices will strengthen the belongingness dimension

of a climate for inclusion through fulfilling follower needs for membership

P3b: A spiritual leader’s inclusive practices will strengthen the uniqueness dimension of a

climate for inclusion through fulfilling follower needs for calling.

19

Spiritual leadership as a leadership style that incorporates positive emotions, pro-social

character strengths, eudaimonic well-being and genuine concern for the needs of others,

facilitates value congruence across multiple levels of organizational life (Huang and Shih,

2011). More specifically, a spiritual leader nurtures a vision of service in view of advancing

purposeful relationships informed by an experience of calling, of the inherent value of each

stakeholder in furthering the common good.In this respect, spiritual leaders encourage

practices that enhance feelings of self-worth akin to unique individual attributes. Spiritual

leaders also engage in practices that strengthen experiences of membership in, pertinent to

feelings of belongingness to, a work community. We in turn propose that:

P4: A spiritual leader’s inclusive practices will mediate the relationship between spiritual

leadership and a workgroup climate for inclusion.

Follower and organizational outcomes of spiritual leaders’ inclusiveness

We have so far theorized employees’ experiences of belongingness and uniqueness as

proximal outcomes of spiritual leadership inclusiveness. We proceed to discuss potential

distal outcomes of such inclusiveness.

Extant literature on diversity climates highlights the decisive role of inclusiveness in

evading detrimental, as well as fostering beneficial outcomes. For example, Sliter et al.

(2014) examined the impact of these climates on gendered experiences of interpersonal

conflict: inclusive values were conducive to higher levels of work engagement, as well as

exerted an indirect effect on well-being, in particular a buffering effect on conflict-induced

burnout. Perceptions of diversity climates were also found to yield organizational

commitment, empowerment and job-satisfaction (Wolfson et al.,2011). Downey et al.

(2015) found that diversity practices induced trusting climates that were positively

associated with employee engagement. Interestingly, this relationship was moderated by

inclusion: the diversity management and work engagement relationship was stronger when

employees experienced positive feelings in inclusive climates. Equally importantly, an

affirming climate for diversity generated perceptions of equitable treatment that in turn

resulted in decreased intentions to turnover (Chrobot- Mason and Aramovich, 2013).

As noted earlier, employees feel valued, experience psychological safety and most

importantly, they act with authenticity in workplaces in which diversity is attended to and

honored by their leaders. Leader inclusiveness, interacting with a positive psychological

20

diversity climate, generates beneficial outcomes for both organizations and societies (Randel

et al.,2016). Ferdman and Roberts (2014) argue that bringing one’s whole self to work is a

fundamental component of inclusion; followers enjoy beneficial outcomes when they are

allowed to enact their multiple identities in different situations, depending on the varying

degrees to which work contexts facilitate or hinder the likelihood of unleashing multiple

aspects of selves. In a similar vein of reasoning, spiritual leaders strengthen these beneficial

outcomes insofar as they facilitate employee personal development and self-determination,

as well as respect followers’ inner life (Rego et al., 2008; Honiball et al., 2014). Interestingly,

McKee et al. (2011) found that transformational leaders influenced employee well-being

through their ability to enhance employees’ sense of community, a principal dimension of

workplace spirituality that is akin to membership in Fry’s (2003) model of spiritual

leadership.. We thus suggest that:

P5: Climates for inclusion strengthened through spiritual leadership will enhance diverse

employees’ psychological empowerment and career advancement.

Societal practices can interactively affect leaders’ inclusiveness (Lukensmeyer et

al.,2014). Mor Barak and Daya (2014) argue that, by employing inclusive strategies

organizations can go beyond corporate social responsibility to advance inclusion prospects

with respect to both local communities and global contexts. A major conceptual shift is thus

required, from corporate philanthropy to practices that elevate societal contexts to valued

stakeholders of an expanded inclusive vision.

Inclusion constitutes a societal good that should be treated accordingly. Spiritual

leadership involves such a societal component because it incorporates ethical and spiritual

well-being on which corporate social performance can be grounded: this corporate model is

“based on spiritual leadership across the strategic, empowered team, and individual levels

that is far more transparent and places greater emphasis on vision and value congruence

with all stakeholders” (Fry, 2005a, pp.75-76). Spiritual leadership theory embodies a

vision/stakeholder analysis process “suited to organizations that seek to be collaborative,

inclusive, and genuinely caring for both the people within the organization and those who

serve” (Fry, 2008, p.119).

In addition, spiritual leadership, integrated with workplace spirituality theories, was found

to support a wide range of pro-social behaviors (eg. Afsar et al.,2016). According to Kurth

(2003), spiritually inspired service at work involves a transcendental dimension focusing on

21

connectedness and integrating spiritual values into organizational practices, and a personal

dimension, centered on spiritual growth and integrity. These two dimensions are entwined

with a relational dimension establishing caring relationships with others based on dignity

and respect, as well as a communal dimension, grounded in a sense of inclusiveness and

sustainability. In respective importance, Fairholm and Gronau (2015) argue that spiritual

leaders engage in specific approaches toward followers centered on inspiring others, building

community and promoting stewardship, and orienting others toward service, so that self-

interest is subsumed in concern for others. Moreover, spiritual leaders will help inclusion to

be positioned more strategically, as akin to the vision and philosophy of an organization

viewed as an integral part of a larger community. We thus deem that spiritual leadership

will help corporate and societal stakeholders to act in a synergistic manner, by becoming

more accountable and committed to various societal contexts. We then propose that:

P6: Inclusive climates shaped through spiritual leadership will promote both organizational

and societal good.

Discussion

Our purpose in this article was to develop an integrated model of spiritual leadership

inclusiveness in order to designate processes that allow inclusion to be positioned more

strategically in organizational settings. We proposed that spiritual leaders are effective in

strengthening employees’ perceptions of belongingness and uniqueness, in conformity to

Shore’s et al. (2011) framework, and suggested that spiritual leadership entails multilevel

(individual, organizational and societal) inclusiveness outcomes. Concomitantly, the

contribution of this paper is twofold: to fill the existing gap in the spiritual leadership

literature regarding spiritual leaders’ inclusiveness, as well as to expand on specific issues

situated at the intersection of leadership and inclusion streams of literature and research.

With respect to the first objective, the model elaborated in this study is intended to

underscore the inclusiveness of this leadership style, as well as its potential in fostering

inclusive practices that affect employee perceptions of inclusion. We should mention at this

point that, despite the abundant literature on integrating spirituality and diversity, research

on spiritual leadership inclusiveness dimensions remains sparse and fragmented. Given this

gap in literature, it is reasonable to seek an enhanced understanding as to why a spiritual

leader is expected to cultivate an environment in which diverse employees thrive. Our model

22

suggests that spiritual leaders are exhibiting behaviors embedded in values of altruistic love

that will in turn address followers’ needs for uniqueness and belongingness through calling

and membership of both leaders and followers.

With regard to the second objective, our model contributes to the inclusion literature by

demonstrating that spiritual leadership is invested with a potential for inclusion. Our model

illustrates more clearly the type of leader values in response to leader inclusiveness criteria

set forth by Gallegos (2014), Booysen (2014) and Wuffli (2016), insofar as this leadership

style elevates humanity, respect and virtue to an ultimate value of leader development. Our

model seeks to enrich the inclusive leadership literature by providing permeating insights

into the nature of inclusive processes by identifying value-systems that help organizations

institutionalize inclusion. Prior research has not adequately investigated why and how

spiritual leaders are particularly efficacious in communicating to followers the intrinsic value

of inclusion. We thus draw greater attention to the importance of spiritual leadership to

aligning inclusive practices with vision, as well as to accommodating followers’ multiple

identities and framing diversity sensitive mindsets. More specifically:

Aligning inclusive strategies with vision: Our theorizing takes a more nuanced approach

to inclusive practices, by embedding them in other organizational sub-systems. Despite the

instrumental rationales for inclusion that dominate corporate goals, inclusive practices have

to be aligned with HR strategies to harmonize business case and resource-based

underpinnings of inclusion (Donnelly,2015). Organizations integrating inclusion into their HR

strategies are more likely to experience beneficial outcomes compared to those that focus

on isolated initiatives, but fail to align their policies with inclusive practices, or fall short of

ensuring that diversity is embraced as an organizational competency (Scott et al., 2011).

Spiritual leadership can reinforce a process of institutionalizing inclusion: diverse employees

are more likely to benefit from spiritual leaders insofar as the latter not only encourage

followers to bring their whole and authentic selves to work, but they also foster continual

learning, meaning seeking and personal growth. This leader competence meets the

requirements of Stewart’s et al. (2008) inclusiveness instruction: acknowledging others’

beliefs through self-reflexivity and cultivating positive interactions between social identity

groups in view of mitigating tensions between HR rhetoric and practice. Spiritual leadership

enables such an alignment between vision, mission and strategy.

23

Accommodating multiple and intersecting identities. Another of our goals was to

demonstrate that organizational cultures built on values of altruistic love focus on the

acknowledgment of the diverse employee not in terms of a fragmented identity, but as a

human person in its wholeness. Out-group members will be empowered to incorporate their

unique experiences into the process of team building, thus enjoying the value of uniqueness

of each human being. In addition, feelings of belongingness assume greater salience

primarily for those employees who experience identity segregations due to intersecting but

competing identities, fact that generates intrapersonal conflict. We thus deem that, beyond

reducing intergroup conflict, spiritual leadership may be pivotal to mitigating intrapersonal

tensions. Our suggestion is in alignment with Byrd’s (2014) view of social justice as an

emerging form of spirituality: in this view, individuals may be motivated to embrace

spirituality as a coping strategy for oppression and as a means to alleviate social

disadvantage. Spirituality is invaluable in reframing identities through inclusivity, thus

entailing both individual emancipation and organizational change.

Framing diversity sensitive mindsets: Our model provides a framework for conceptualizing

spiritual leadership potential for enhancing leader competences pertinent to inclusive goal-

setting. Inclusion is a transformational, results-oriented and sustainable strategy

(Wheeler,2014) that requires intercultural competences, namely self-awareness, curiosity

and empathy incorporating the cognitive, affective and behavioral skills to enhance

prospects of inclusion (Bennett, 2014), through constructive interpersonal interactions

(Hays-Thomas et al., 2012). Among various leader skills, the development of diversity

sensitive mindsets remains a main priority for leaders.

Spirituality and diversity remain two pervasive constructs in life, fact that necessitates a

deeper understanding of the cognitive, affective and behavioral processes underlying their

interrelationship. By motivating followers to engage in meaningful reflection on the deepest

human needs for consideration, appreciation, participation and connectivity, spiritual leaders

develop diversity mindsets that prove effective in harmonizing identity integration on one

hand, and employees’ aspiration to draw on their authentic selves on the other, thus

reconciling the needs for belongingness and uniqueness, respectively.

In sum, spiritual leadership as a form of transcendental leadership, is both leader- and

follower-centered: it expands on existing leadership theories in motivating followers

intrinsically, extrinsically and transcendentally through altruistic love, a sense of wholeness,

24

harmony and well-being exemplified through care, authentic concern and appreciation of

others (Liu,2007). Spiritual leaders support practices akin to an experience of both

uniqueness and belongingness through fulfilling follower needs for spiritual well-being,

calling and membership, thus shaping inclusive climates.

Limitations

Our model is not without limitations, some of which stem from the need to sacrifice model

specificity for maintaining model parsimony, and enhancing the model’s explanatory

significance. Other variables such as employee openness to diversity, may act as boundary

conditions that delineate prospects of the proposed model. Krishnakumar et al.(2015) for

instance, included into their spiritual leadership model followers’ feelings of connectedness,

leader charisma, existential faith, and contingency factors, among which perceptions of

leader integrity, pro-social motivation to lead, and perceived organizational support.

Moreover, we did not consider the impact of historical patterns of exclusion on the

perceptions and efficacy of inclusive leadership practices. Since our framework has not

examined these factors, a more articulated, comprehensive model needs to be developed.

Furthermore, workplace spirituality is an overarching framework, commensurate with

other leadership styles, beyond spiritual leadership. For example, Mack et al. (2014) posit

that transformational leadership as anchored in spirituality, can significantly influence

meaning-seeking, purpose and interconnectedness, by inspiring and motivating followers to

behave in accordance with inclusiveness principles.Taken for granted that workplace

spirituality may be supportive of other types of values-based or transcendental leadership,

the ability of spiritual leadership to predict inclusive climates might be overestimated.

Nevertheless, and despite this potential overlapping between spiritual leadership and

relevant leadership styles, the heuristic ability of spiritual leadership remains an important

one that deserves further investigation in inclusion theory and practice.

Recommendations for future research

Our propositions are premised on the argument that spiritual leadership can mitigate

social identity groups’ concerns. This is the explicit focus of our study which can give an

25

impetus to the integration of spiritual values into the literature of inclusive leadership by

enabling leadership scholars to develop insightful thinking on new research avenues.

To begin with, there is a number of research questions that remain to be addressed

concerning the possibility of an eventual resistance to spiritual leaders’ inclusiveness. This

issue will be of equal interest to researchers as they attempt to integrate spirituality into

inclusive leadership. Reflecting on our model, we demonstrate the utility of greater attention

to the interplay between contextual factors, the predominance of instrumental goal-setting,

and followers’ traits as determinants of spiritual leaders’ efficacy for inclusion.

Embedding spirituality and diversity in social contexts: As previously argued, spiritual

leaders have to alleviate employee discomfort stemming from multiple and intersecting

identities. Not infrequently however, workforce diversity is entrenched in processes in which

unequal distribution of resources entwined with disparities in status reinforces social

disadvantage, to the detriment of social equality considerations (DiTomaso et al.,2007).To

reduce inequities instigated by power asymmetries, leaders strive to promote inclusion of

vulnerable populations within both organizations and society (Fujimoto et al.,2014).

A critical issue for further investigation is the degree of contextual fit of spiritual

leadership, given the pervasiveness of a variety of societal factors. Phipps (2012) for

instance, argues that the spiritual beliefs of senior leaders will influence decision making

contingent on the specific context and leadership style. We are thus in need of new research

that will explore the ways in which spiritual leaders will face resistance to inclusion due to

followers’ differentials in power and status, the latter eventually impeding any effort to

inaugurate a shared, transcendent vision. Our suggestion to consider the societal

embeddedness of spiritual leadership remains in alignment with Chaston and Lips-Wiersma

(2015) who noted that spiritual leadership should take into account power differentials

among followers and asymmetries in organizational hierarchies. Failure in so doing would

generate feelings of distrust in followers, despite the prevalence of inclusive practices such

as participation, connection and altruism.

Furthermore, we should not be ignorant of the reality that workplaces denote a social

space in which the complex entwinements of social identities embedded in societal systems,

are reproduced and perpetuated. As a result, employees may experience marginalization in

negotiating potential tensions between their personal spiritual and religious sensibilities on

one hand, and the organizational strategy to institutionalize workplace spirituality, on the

26

other. This complicated reality necessitates spirituality and religiosity interventions that

acknowledge particular histories of marginalized identities. Schaeffer and Mattis (2012) for

instance, employ an intersectional approach to spirituality and diversity according to which

favoring certain spiritual and religious identities at the workplace would endanger

inclusiveness pursuits, insofar as a unified objective spirituality would maintain structural

discrimination of unprivileged groups. In consequence, “any effort to view workplace

spirituality as entirely individual, universal or as acontextual will be inherently unrealistic”

(Schaeffer and Mattis, 2012, p.329). We thus plausibly argue that certain processes involved

in our model will be enacted differently in different organizational contexts, yet this

particularity does not alter the universal need for appeal to shared spiritual values. Research

on spiritual leadership drawing on principles embedded in both religious and secular cultures

that are in a position to promote social justice, dignity and mutual respect to all

organizational members, is particularly welcome.

The challenges of economic rationality: Instrumental, economic rationales pose a major

challenge to leadership paradigms that focus on the intrinsic worthiness of ethics and

responsibility as foundational principles and values. Undoubtedly, certain workplaces may

not be susceptible toward spiritual transformation (Marques,2006); such environments

dominated by business imperatives pose a potential threat to spirituality and spiritual-based

leadership (Pruzan,2015). As Pruzan (2008, p.104) indicates,“this instrumental perspective

on values, ethics and responsibility reduces them to means for serving a higher rationality:

economic rationality”. Our suggestion to consider ongoing tensions between business

imperatives and personal belief-systems reflects certain concerns of critical perspectives on

workplace spirituality according to which instrumentality and control reflect a potential dark

side of workplace spirituality emerging at the intersection of individuals and organizations

(Lips-Wiersma et al,2009). In short, spiritual leader inclusiveness should not be viewed as

a means manipulated instrumentally to secure profitability and other economic benefits, but

rather as a valued resource enabling employees to unfold their own identities and values

(Case and Gosling, 2010).

One potential way to mitigate the instrumentality dilemma consists in employing

approaches in the context of which no one concern (individual fulfillment, instrumentality,

societal good) is privileged over, or takes precedence upon another (Sheep, 2006, p.370).

In our case, spiritual leader inclusiveness should have to concurrently meet the distinct

27

needs for personal growth, economic performance and sustainability: favoring one

dimension at the expense of others may prove detrimental to individual, organizational or

societal well-being, respectively. Further research can be pursued to explore how spiritual

leaders attempt to cope with factors impeding inclusion, given that spiritual leadership styles

are intended to balance interests of different stakeholders, as denoted earlier.

Integrating followers’ responses to inclusive practices.Last, but not least, from the

inverse lenses of followership theory, one might examine the degree to which followers will

replicate spiritual leaders’ behaviors, and primarily how diverse followers’ responses to

inclusive practices will affect leaders’ endeavor to motivate followers behave in an inclusive

manner. Such interactions between followership and leadership will help employees unfold

their authentic selves, yet they are not always taken into consideration by the inclusive

rhetoric of business leaders, as denoted by Tourish and Tourish (2010).

Furthermore, spiritual leaders’ inclusiveness outcomes are contingent on value

congruence between the organizational culture and the spiritual values of the individuals.

This person-organization fit presupposes that employees embrace the organizationally

espoused spiritual values only if they agree with the particular way spirituality is enacted,

otherwise the integration of spirituality would enter into potential conflict with employees’

particular value-systems. In this case, adopting spiritual practices would be ineffective and

incur significant costs for organizations insofar as implementing spirituality would be

detrimental to employees with minority spiritual beliefs (Word, 2012, p.159). In other words,

spiritual values should be enacted through an inclusivity that will respect personal identities,

in view of strengthening employee perceptions of inclusion. Taken for granted that both

constructs of spiritual leadership and inclusive climates embody the dimension of employee

facilitation to bring their whole selves at work, it would be interesting to investigate under

which conditions a synergistic, aggregative effect on followers’ feelings of inclusion, is

reinforced, or attenuated. In sum, it is incumbent upon those who would further

conceptualize spiritual leadership inclusiveness to elucidate these reciprocating mechanisms,

fact that is strongly encouraged.

The need for model’s operationalization and testing. Last, but not least, our propositions

relating spiritual leadership to climates for inclusion should be empirically tested.

Researchers who employ quantitative methodologies may develop a longitudinal research

design based on multisource questionnaires that is expected to facilitate testing of

28

propositions, in accordance with previous empirical studies on the effect of leadership styles

on diversity climates (eg. Brimhall et al., 2014). A number of validated measures on spiritual

leadership dimensions can be used to this very purpose, subject to potential minor

modifications, if deemed necessary. For example, in their longitudinal survey on spiritual

leadership Fry et al.(2005) developed a 26-item Spiritual Leadership Scale that was recently

validated in two major Confucian societies, in China and Taiwan (Chen and Yang, 2012;

Chen et al.,2012). Fry et al.(2005) measured the three spiritual leadership dimensions using

a 17 items sub-scale: vision (5 items), hope/faith (5 items) and altruistic love (7 items). The

spiritual well-being dimensions were measured through a 9-item sub-scale comprising

calling (4 items) and membership (5 items). Employing structural equation modeling

technique, Jeon et al. (2013) slightly adapted and validated a 39 items revised spiritual

leadership model (developed by Fry,2008, pp.116-118) in a Korean organizational context.

Fry’s revised scale embodied a 5 items dimension of inner life, the extent to which both

leaders and followers engage in spiritual practices and participate in meaningful work amidst

the context of community. Equally importantly, Nishii (2013) developed and validated a

three-dimensional scale of climate for inclusion, comprising foundation of equitable

management practices (9 items), integration of differences (11 items), and inclusion in

decision making (11 items).

Furthermore, multilevel regression analysis can be employed to test the operationalized

model, in line with previous efforts that tested hypotheses with respect to relationships

between transformational leadership and workgroup climate (eg. McMurray et al., 2012;

Wang et al.,2013), leader inclusiveness and diversity climates (eg. Randel et al.,2016), or

authentic leadership and inclusive climates (Cottrill et al.,2014). Equally importantly,

structural equation modeling could be used to test the mediating proposition (P4) and

proximal outcomes (P3a, P3b). Despite its potential limitations in management research (

Stromeyer et al.,2015), this method is supportive of attempts at model specification, in

accordance with previous studies on the relationship between transformational (Ashikali and

Groeneveld, 2015) and shared (Hoch, 2014) leadership, and workplace diversity.

Researchers could also employ qualitative methodologies, in alignment with a renewed

interest in this type of management research (eg. Guercini, 2014). For instance, in-depth

interviews with spiritual leaders and followers would be in a position to provide permeating

insights into the type of inclusive practices adopted by spiritual leaders in their effort to

29

shape a climate for inclusion, as well as into employees’ responses to, and replication of,

leaders’ inclusive behaviors. Qualitative research will help organizations to design case-

sensitive interventions, the nature of which we shall briefly discuss in the following section.

Implications for human resource development

Finally, our proposals involve important practical implications. Organizations operating in

diverse settings can substantially benefit from spiritual leaders’ inclusiveness. Spiritual

leaders can instill new meaning to inclusiveness by enabling disadvantaged employees to

unfold their authentic selves through purposeful activities, thus unleashing followers’

potential for growth. Spiritual leaders are in a position to make majority members realize

that inclusion yields beneficial outcomes to all stakeholders as a worthy pursuit that furthers

the common good. These attitudes will allow lower level managers to display enhanced

sensitivity about differences,ameliorating their relations with diverse employees, and helping

social identity groups to flourish. These managers are in turn expected to neutralize factors

that account for deferential perceptions in employment practices, thus reinforcing experience

of fairness within organizations. Moreover, enhanced participation in decision-making

processes will help diverse followers to experience more comfort in sharing even their

dissenting ideas. In sum, spiritual leadership will support targeted interventions that reflect

a multi-level developmental process toward inclusion.

First and foremost, at the organizational level spiritual leaders leverage inclusive practices

that result in positive expectations about the moral value of diversity; they will encourage

interventions reflecting an internal fit among HR practices, and aligning inclusive initiatives

with other organizational sub-systems (cf, Feldman et al.,2006). Policies grounded on

universally held values can significantly expand the scope of practices addressing the needs

of globally underrepresented groups (Derven,2014; Goodman,2013).

Most importantly, communicating inclusion goals to employees has to be complemented

with practices centered on social justice, spirituality, fairness, and shared principles (Hayles,

2014). Organizations that tend to satisfy employees’ spiritual needs enhance feelings of

psychological safety by allowing employees experience respectful treatment: people realize

that they are appreciated as human persons, a reality that in turn enhances purposeful

behaviors, self-determination and belongingness (Rego and Cunha, 2008).

30

Spiritual leaders can find ways to personify and model the values and attitudes of altruistic

love through inclusive practices, in conformity to the principles of an inclusive diversity

education (cf, Thomas et al.,2010). Noteworthy however, is that the inclusiveness of

spirituality in management education remains contingent on the premises to encourage

mutual respect for other’s spiritualities, to design and implement inclusive activities that

incorporate diverse spiritual perspectives, as well as to avoid imposing one’s set of spiritual

beliefs upon others (McCormick, 2006).

Second, at the team level, spiritual leaders espouse a holistic worldview manifested in

considerably reducing tensions both within and between social identity groups, enhancing

wellness of vulnerable groups and encouraging the formation of inclusive networks. As in

the case of enacting transcendental leadership, spiritual practices facilitate a substantial shift

from individual to shared experiences (Barney et al.,2015), this being the cornerstone of

inclusive processes. Spiritual leadership in particular, fosters such an ego-transcendence

through practices that reflect an empathetic understanding of others (Klaus and Fernando,

2016). More specifically, by creating opportunities for employees to share whole selves,

spiritual leaders will encourage debunking of stereotypes, that in turn will generate improved

trust and communication within the organization and enhanced perceived comfort with being

authentic at work. Spiritual leaders who draw on Reave’s (2005) and Fry’s (2005a) spiritual

values, develop the capacity of reconciling competing interests, eliminating stereotyping

representations of otherness and forging constructive interactions between different sub-

groups, thus helping teams to realize the value of social harmony.

And third, at the individual level spiritual leaders are invested with character strengths in

view of reconciling fragmented identities of unprivileged employees (immigrant workers, low

status expatriates). Spiritual leadership fosters diverse employees’ self-efficacy primarily

through its potential to alleviate identity concerns of employees with multiple and

intersecting identities, and to manage social disadvantage through emotional healing. To

reiterate, a spiritual leader is honoring the beliefs and identities of others, enabling them to

develop their potential by providing counsel, guidance and encouragement to her/his

followers, notwithstanding status differentials underlying demographically diverse settings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our intention in this article was to merge two research streams, those of

spiritual leadership and inclusion literatures. Spiritual leadership is embodying potential to

31

not only leverage diversity, but also to shape a climate for inclusion, in which the distinct

needs for belongingness and uniqueness are concurrently fulfilled through calling and

membership of both followers and leaders, respectively. We hope that our model will prompt

further inquiry and enhance scholarly research regarding spiritual leadership potential for

inclusion by helping inclusion to be viewed as both an organizational and societal good,

embedded in social contexts and pertinent to vision, mission and organizational philosophy.

References

Albuquerque,I.F., Cunha,R.C., Martins,L.D. and Sá, A.B.(2014),”Primary health care

services:Workplace spirituality and organizational performance”,Journal of Organizational

Change Management,Vol.27 No.1,pp.59-82.

32

Afsar, B., Badir, Y., and Kiani, U.S.(2016),”Linking spiritual leadership and employee pro-

environmental behavior: The influence of workplace spirituality, intrinsic motivation, and

environmental passion”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol.45,pp.79-88.

Andrews,R. and Ashworth,R.(2015),”Representation and inclusion in public

organizations:Evidence from the U.K. civil service”,Public Administration Review,Vol.75

No.2,pp.279-288.

Arnetz,B.B., Ventimiglia,M., Beech,P., Demarinis,V., Lökk,J. and Arnetz,J.E.(2013),”

Spiritual values and practices in the workplace and employee stress and mental well-

being”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion,Vol.10 No.3,pp.271-281.

Ashikali,T. and Groeneveld,S.(2015),”Diversity management in public organizations and

its effect on employees’ affective commitment: The role of transformational leadership and

the inclusiveness of the organizational culture”,Review of Public Personnel Administration

Vol.35 No.2,pp.146-168.

Ashmos, D.P. and Duchon, D.(2000),”Spirituality at work: A conceptualization and

measure”, Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol.9 No.2, pp.134-145.

Barney, J.B., Wicks, J., Otto Scharmer, C., and Pavlovich, K.(2015),”Exploring

transcendental leadership: A conversation”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and

Religion, Vol.12 No.4, pp. 290-304.

Bell,M.P., Özbilgin,M.F., Beauregard,T.A. and Sürgevil,O.(2011),”Voice, silence, and

diversity in 21st century organizations:Strategies for inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and

transgender employees”,Human Resource Management,Vol.50 No.1,pp.131-146.

Benefiel,M.(2005),”The second half of the journey:Spiritual leadership for organizational

transformation”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.723-747.

Benefiel,M., Fry,L.W. and Geigle,D.(2014),”Spirituality and religion in the workplace:

History, theory, and research,Psychology of Religion and Spirituality,Vol.6 No.3,p.175-187.

Bennett,J.M.(2014),”Intercultural competence: Vital perspectives for diversity and

inclusion”,in Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of

inclusion.Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,pp.155-176.

Brimhall, K.C., Lizano, E.L., and Mor Barak, M.E.(2014),”The mediating role of inclusion:

A longitudinal study of the effects of leader-member exchange and diversity climate on job

satisfaction and intention to leave among child welfare workers”,Children and Youth Services

Review, Vol.40, pp.79-88.

33

Boehm,S.A., Kunze,F. and Bruch,H.(2014),”Spotlight on age-diversity climate:The impact

of age-inclusive HR practices on firm-level outcomes”,Personnel Psychology,Vol. 67

No.3,pp.667-704.

Boekhorst, J.A.(2015),”The role of authentic leadership in fostering workplace inclusion:

A social information processing perspective”,Human Resource Management,Vol.54 No.2,

pp.241-264.

Bolton, S.(2010),”Being human: dignity of labor as the foundation for the spirit-work

connection”, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.7, No.2,pp.157-172.

Booysen,L.(2014),”The development of inclusive leadership practice and processes”, In

Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of inclusion.Wiley-

Blackwell, Oxford,pp.296-329.

Brophy,M.(2015),”Spirituality incorporated: Including convergent spiritual values in

business”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.132 No.4, pp.779-794.

Byrd, M.Y.(2014),”Spirituality and diversity in the workforce”, in Byrd, M.Y. and Scott,

S.L.(eds), Diversity in the workforce: Current issues and emerging trends, Taylor and

Francis, London, pp. 201-217.

Carmeli,A., Reiter-Palmon,R. and Ziv,E.(2010),”Inclusive leadership and employee

involvement in creative tasks in the workplace:The mediating role of psychological safety

”,Creativity Research Journal,Vol.22 No.3,pp.250-260.

Case,P., and Gosling,J.(2010),”The spiritual organization:Critical reflections on the

instrumentality of workplace spirituality”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion,

Vol.7 No.4,pp.257-282.

Chaston,J. and Lips-Wiersma,M.(2015),”When spirituality meets hierarchy:Leader

spirituality as a double-edged sword”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion

Vol.12 No.2,pp.111-128.

Chavez,C.I. and Weisinger,J.Y.(2008),”Beyond diversity training:A social infusion for

cultural inclusion”,Human Resource Management,Vol.47 No.2,pp.331-350.

Chen,C. and Yang,C.(2012),”The impact of spiritual leadership on organizational

citizenship behavior:A multi-sample analysis”,Journal of Business Ethics,Vol.105 No.1,

pp.107-114.

34

Chen,C., Yang,C. and Li,C.(2012),”Spiritual leadership, follower mediators, and

organizational outcomes:Evidence from three industries across two major Chinese

societies”,Journal of Applied Social Psychology,Vol.42 No.4,pp.890-938.

Chin,J.L.(2010),”Introduction to the special issue on diversity and leadership”,American

Psychologist,Vol.65 No.3,pp.150-156.

Chrobot-Mason,D. and Aramovich, N.P.(2013),”The psychological benefits of creating an

affirming climate for workplace diversity”,Group and Organization Management,Vol.38

No.6,pp.659-689.

Chrobot-Mason,D., Duderman,M.N., Weber,T.J. and Ernst,C.(2009),”The challenge of

leading on unstable grounds:Triggers that activate social identity faultlines”,Human

Relations,Vol. 62 No.11,pp.1763-1794.

Cottrill, K., Lopez,P.D. and Hoffman,C.C.(2014),”How authentic leadership and inclusion

benefit organizations”,Equality, Diversity and Inclusion,Vol.33 No.3,pp.275-292.

Crossman, J.(2015),”Eclecticism and commonality in employee constructions of

spirituality”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.12 No.1,pp.59-77.

Crossman,J.(2010),”Conceptualising spiritual leadership in secular organizational

contexts and its relation to transformational, servant and environmental leadership”,

Leadership and Organization Development Journal,Vol.31No.7,pp.596-608.

Da Rocha,J.P.(2009),”Inclusion and diversity as an intercultural task”,in Ozbilgin,

M.F.(ed), Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at Work:A Research Companion. Edward Elgar,

Cheltenham, UK.,pp.289-300.

Daya,P. and April,K.A.(2014),”The relationship between demographic groups and

perception of inclusion in a South African organization”,South African Journal of Business

Management,Vol.45 No.2,pp.25-34.

Dent,E.B., Higgins,M.E. and Wharff,D.M.(2005),”Spirituality and leadership:An empirical

review of definitions, distinctions, and embedded assumptions”,Leadership Quarterly, Vol.16

No.5,pp.625-653.

Derven,M.(2014),”Diversity and inclusion by design:Best practices from six global

companies”,Industrial and Commercial Training,Vol.46 No.2,pp.84-91.

DiTomaso,N., Post,C. and Parks-Yancy,R.(2007),”Workforce diversity and inequality:

Power, status and numbers”,Annual Review of Sociology,Vol.33,pp.473-501.

35

Donnelly,R.(2015),”Tensions and challenges in the management of diversity and inclusion

in IT services multinationals in India”,Human Resource Management,Vol.54 No.2,pp.199-

215.

Downey,S.N., van der Werff,L., Thomas,K.M. and Plaut,V.C.(2015),”The role of diversity

practices and inclusion in promoting trust and employee engagement”,Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, Vol.45 No.1,pp.35-44.

Driscoll,C. and McKee,M.(2007),”Restoring a culture of ethical and spiritual values:A role

for leader storytelling”,Journal of Business Ethics,Vol.73 No.2,pp.205-217.

Duchon,D. and Plowman,D.A.(2005),”Nurturing the spirit at work:Impact on work unit

performance”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.807-833.

Duffy,R.D., Reidb,L. and Dikc,B.J.(2010),”Spirituality, religion, and career development:

Implications for the workplace”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion,Vol.7

No.3,pp.209-221.

Dutton,J.E., Workman,K. and Hardin,A.E.(2014),”Compassion at work”,Annual Review of

Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,Vol.1,pp.277-304.

Eagly,A.N. and Chin,J.L.(2010),”Diversity and leadership in a changing world”,American

Psychologist,Vol.65 No.3,pp.216-224.

Fairholm, M.R. and Gronau,T.W.(2015),”Spiritual leadership in the work of public

administrators.Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.12 No.4,pp.354-373.

Farndale,E., Biron,M., Briscoe,D.R. and Raghuram,S.(2015),”A global perspective on

diversity and inclusion in work organizations”,International Journal of Human Resource

Management,Vol.26 No.6,pp.677-687.

Fehr,R. and Gelfand,M.J.(2012),”The forgiving organization:A multilevel model of

forgiveness at work”,Academy of Management Review,Vol.37 No.4,pp.664-688.

Feldman,M.S., Khademian,A.M., Ingram,H. and Schneider,A.S.(2006),”Ways of knowing

and inclusive management practices,”Public Administration Review,Vol.66, No.S1,pp.89-99

Ferdman,B.M.(2014),”The practice of inclusion in diverse organizations:Toward a

systemic and inclusive framework”, in Ferdman, B.M. and Deane, B.R.(eds), Diversity at

work: The practice of inclusion.Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,pp.3-54.

Ferdman,B.M. and Roberts,L.M.(2014),”Creating inclusion for oneself:Knowing,

accepting, and expressing one's whole self at work”,in Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),

Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion.Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,pp.93-127.

36

Ferguson,J. and Milliman,J.(2008),”Creating effective core organizational values:A

spiritual leadership approach”,International Journal of Public Administration,Vol.31No.4,

pp.439-459.

Fry,L.(2003),”Toward a theory of spiritual leadership”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.14

No.6,pp.693-727.

Fry,L.(2005a),”Toward a theory of ethical and spiritual well-being, and corporate social

responsibility through spiritual leadership”, in Giacalone,R.A., Jurkiewicz,C.L. and Dunn,

C.(eds.),Positive psychology in business ethics and corporate responsibility. Information Age

Publishing, Greenwich, CT.,pp.47–83.

Fry,L.(2005b),”Introduction to The Leadership Quarterly special issue:Toward a paradigm

of spiritual leadership”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.619–22.

Fry,L.(2008),”Spiritual leadership: State-of-the-art and future directions for theory,

research, and practice”,in Biberman,J. and Tischler,L.(eds.),Spirituality in business: Theory,

practice, and future directions. Palgrave, New York,pp.106–124.

Fry,L and Cohen,M.P.(2009),”Spiritual leadership as a paradigm for organizational

transformation and recovery from extended work hours cultures”,Journal of Business

Ethics,Vol.84 No.SUPPL 2,pp.265-278.

Fry,L. and Kriger,M.(2009),”Towards a theory of being-centered leadership:Multiple levels

of being as context for effective leadership”,Human Relations,Vol.62 No.11,pp. 1667-1696.

Fry,L. and Nisiewicz,M.(2013).Maximizing the triple bottom line through spiritual

leadership.Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.

Fry,L. and Slocum Jr.,J.W.(2008),”Maximizing the triple bottom line through spiritual

leadership”,Organizational Dynamics,Vol.37 No.1,pp.86-96.

Fry,L., Vitucci,S. and Cedillo,M.(2005),”Spiritual leadership and army transformation:

Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.

835-862.

Fujimoto,Y., Rentschler,R., Le,H., Edwards,D. and Härtel,C.E.J.(2014),”Lessons learned

from community organizations:Inclusion of people with disabilities and others”,British

Journal of Management,Vol.25 No.3,pp.518-537.

Gallegos,P.V.(2014),”The work of inclusive leadership: Fostering authentic relationships,

modeling courage and humility”, in Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:

The practice of inclusion.Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,pp.177-202.

37

Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L.(2003), “Toward a science of workplace spirituality”,

in Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L.(eds),Handbook of workplace spirituality and

organizational performance, Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y.,pp.3-28.

Goodman,N.R.(2013),”Taking diversity and inclusion initiatives global”,Industrial and

Commercial Training,Vol.45 No.3,pp.180-183.

Groggins,A. and Ryan,A.M.(2013),”Embracing uniqueness:The underpinnings of a positive

climate for diversity”,Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol.86

No.2,pp.264-282.

Guercini,S.(2014),”New qualitative research methodologies in management”,

Management Decision, Vol.52 No.4,pp.662-674.

Guillaume,Y.R.F., Dawson,J.F., Priola,V., Sacramento,C.A., Woods,S.A., Higson,H.E.,

Budhwar,P.S. and West,M.A.(2014),”Managing diversity in organizations:An integrative

model and agenda for future research”,European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology,Vol.23 No.5,pp.783-802.

Gupta, M., Kumar, V., and Singh, M.(2014),”Creating satisfied employees through

workplace spirituality: A study of the private insurance sector in Punjab (India)”, Journal of

Business Ethics, Vol.122 No.1, pp.79-88.

Hayles, V.R.(2014),”Communicating about diversity and inclusion”, in Ferdman,B.M. and

Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion.Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp.55-

90.

Hays-Thomas,R., Bowen,A. and Boudreaux,M.(2012),”Skills for diversity and inclusion in

organizations:A review and preliminary investigation”,The Psychologist-Manager Journal

Vol.15 No.2,pp.128-141.

Hirak,R., Peng,A.C., Carmeli,A. and Schaubroeck,J.M.(2012),Linking leader inclusiveness

to work unit performance:The importance of psychological safety and learning from

failures”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.23 No.1,pp.107-117.

Hoch, J.E.(2014),”Shared leadership, diversity, and information sharing in teams”, Journal

of Managerial Psychology, Vol.29 No.5, pp.541-564.

Hofhuis,J., van der Zee,K.I. and Otten,S.(2012),”Social identity patterns in culturally

diverse organizations:The role of diversity climate”,Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Vol.42 No.4,pp.964–989.

38

Honiball, G., Geldenhuys, D. and Mayer, C.(2014),”Acknowledging others as 'whole

beings': Managers' perceptions of spirituality and health in the South African workplace”,

International Review of Psychiatry, Vol.26 No.3, pp.289-301.

Huang,Y. and Shih,H.(2011),”The pro-social and moral character of the spiritual leader”,

Social Behavior and Personality,Vol.39 No.1,pp.33-40.

Jeon,K.S., Passmore,D.L., Lee,C. and Hunsaker,W.(2013),”Spiritual leadership:A

validation study in a Korean context”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion Vol.10

No.4,pp.342-357.

Jönsson,S., Muhonen,T., Scholten,C. and Wigerfelt,A.S.(2014),”Illusive inclusion:

Construction of leaders and employees based on nationality”,Cross Cultural Management

Vol.21 No.2,pp.245-260.

Kensbock, J.M. and Boehm, S.A.(2016),”The role of transformational leadership in the

mental health and job performance of employees with disabilities”, International Journal of

Human Resource Management, Vol.27 No.14, pp. 1580-1609.

Klaus, L. and Fernando, M.(2016),”Enacting spiritual leadership in business through ego-

transcendence”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol.37 No.1, pp.71-92.

König, J.(2010),”Spirituality and diversity”, in S. Nandram and M.E. Borden (eds),

Spirituality and business: Exploring possibilities for a new management paradigm, Springer,

Berlin, pp.101-107.

Krishnakumar,S., Houghton,J.D., Neck,C.P. and Ellison,C.N.(2015),”The "good" and the

"bad" of spiritual leadership”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion,Vol.12

No.1,pp.17-37.

Kurth, K.(2003),“Spiritually renewing ourselves at work: Finding meaning through

service”, in Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L.(eds), Handbook of workplace spirituality

and organizational performance, Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y., pp.447-460.

Lawrence,T.B. and Maitlis,S.(2012),”Care and possibility:Enacting an ethic of care through

narrative practices”,Academy of Management Review,Vol.37 No.4,pp.641-663.

Lee,S., Lovelace,K.J. and Manz,C.C.(2014),”Serving with spirit:An integrative model of

workplace spirituality within service organizations”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and

Religion,Vol.11 No.1,pp.45-64.

39

Lips-Wiersma, M., Lund Dean, K., and Fornaciari, C.J.(2009),”Theorizing the dark side of

the workplace spirituality movement”,Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol.18 No.4, pp. 288-

300.

Lips-Wiersma, M. and Mills, A.J.(2014),”Understanding the basic assumptions about

human nature in workplace spirituality: Beyond the critical versus positive divide”, Journal

of Management Inquiry, Vol.23 No.2, pp.148-161.

Lirio,P., Lee,M.D., Williams,M.L., Haugen,L.K. and Kossek, E.E.(2008),”The inclusion

challenge with reduced-load professionals:The role of the manager”,Human Resource

Management,Vol.47 No.3,pp.443-461.

Liu, C.H. (2007),”Transactional, transformational, transcendental leadership: Motivation

effectiveness and measurement of transcendental leadership”, Workshop six: Ethical

leadership in the context of globalization”,University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA.

Liu,C.H. and Robertson,P.(2011),Spirituality in the workplace:Theory and measurement

”,Journal of Management Inquiry,Vol.20 No.1,pp.35-50.

Lukensmeyer,C.J., Yao,M., and Brown,T.(2014),”Fostering inclusion from the outside in:

Engaging diverse citizens in dialogue and decision making”,in Ferdman,B.M. and

Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of inclusion.Wiley, Oxford,pp. 482-505.

Mack, C., Udechukwu, I., and Mujtaba, B.G.(2014),”Workplace spirituality and

transformational leadership: An assessment of their relationship and Fry's causal spiritual

model”, in Zhao, J., de Pablos, P.O. and Tennyson, R.D. (eds), Organizational innovation

and IT governance in emerging economies, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp.114-129.

Madden,L., Duchon,D., Madden,T.M. and Plowman,D.A.(2012),”Emergent organizational

capacity for compassion”,Academy of Management Review,Vol.37 No.4,pp.689-708.

Madison, K. and Kellermanns, F.W.(2013),”Is the spiritual bond bound by blood? An

exploratory study of spiritual leadership in family firms”,Journal of Management, Spirituality

and Religion, Vol.10 No.2, pp.159-182.

Marques,J.F.(2006),”The spiritual worker: An examination of the ripple effect that

enhances quality of life in- and outside the work environment”,Journal of Management

Development,Vol.25 No.9,pp.884-895.

McCormick,D.W.(2006),”Indoctrination, diversity, and teaching about spirituality and

religion in the workplace”, Organization Management Journal, Vol.3, No.2, , pp.77-91.

40

McKee,M.C., Driscoll,C., Kelloway,E.K. and Kelley,E.(2011),”Exploring linkages among

transformational leadership, workplace spirituality and well-being in health care workers”,

Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion,Vol.8 No.3,pp.233-255.

Miller,D.W. and Ewest,T.(2015),”A new framework for analyzing organizational workplace

religion and spirituality”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion Vol.12 No.4,

pp.305-328.

Mitchell,R., Boyle,B., Parker,V., Giles,M., Chiang,V. and Joyce,P.(2015),”Managing

inclusiveness and diversity in teams:How leader inclusiveness affects performance through

status and team identity”,Human Resource Management,Vol.54 No.2,pp.217-239.

Mor-Barak,M.E.(2011),Managing diversity:Toward a globally inclusive workplace.Sage,

London.

Mor Barak,M.E.(2015),”Inclusion is the key to diversity management, but what is

inclusion?”,Human Service Organizations Management, Leadership and Governance,Vol.39

No.2,pp.83-88.

Mor Barak,M.E. and Daya, P.(2014),”Fostering inclusion from the inside out to create an

inclusive workplace: Corporate and organizational efforts in the community and the global

society”, in Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of inclusion.

Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,pp.391-411.

Morris,A.J., Brotheridge,C.M. and Urbanski,J.C.(2005),”Bringing humility to leadership:

Antecedents and consequences of leader humility”,Human Relations,Vol.58 No.10,pp. 1323-

1350.

McMurray, A.J., Islam, M.M., Sarros, J.C. and Pirola-Merlo, A.(2012),”The impact of

leadership on workgroup climate and performance in a non-profit organization,” Leadership

and Organization Development Journal, Vol.33 No.6, pp.522-549.

Ng,E.S.W.(2008),”Why organizations choose to manage diversity?Toward a leadership-

based theoretical framework”,Human Resource Development Review,Vol.7 No.1,pp.58-78

Nishii,L.H.(2013),”The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups”,

Academy of Management Journal,Vol.56 No.6,pp.1754-1774.

Nishii,L.H., Lepak,D.P. and Schneider,B.(2008),”Employee attributions of the "why" of HR

practices:Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction

”,Personnel Psychology,Vol.61 No.3,pp.503-545.

41

Nishii,L.H. and Mayer,D.M.(2009),Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse

groups?The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover

relationship”,Journal of Applied Psychology,Vol.94 No.6,pp.1412-1426.

Nishii,L.H. and. Rich,R.E.(2014),”Creating inclusive climates in diverse organizations”, in

Ferdman, B.M. and Deane, B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of inclusion.Wiley-

Blackwell, Oxford,pp.330-363.

Owens,B.P. and Hekman,D.R.(2012),”Modelling how to grow:An inductive examination of

humble leader behaviours, contingencies, and outcomes”,Academy of Management

Journal,Vol.55 No.4,pp.787-818.

Parameshwar,S.(2005),”Spiritual leadership through ego-transcendence:Exceptional

responses to challenging circumstances”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.689-722.

Pawar,B.S.(2014),”Leadership spiritual behaviors toward subordinates:An empirical

examination of the effects of a leader's individual spirituality and organizational spirituality

”,Journal of Business Ethics,Vol.122 No.3,pp.439-452.

Petriglieri,J.L(2011),”Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to

individuals’ identities”,Academy of Management Review,Vol.36 No.4,pp.641-662.

Phipps,K.A.(2012),”Spirituality and strategic leadership:The influence of spiritual beliefs

on strategic decision making”,Journal of Business Ethics,Vol.106 No.2,pp.177-189.

Pruzan, P.(2008),”Spiritual-based leadership in business”,Journal of Human Values,

Vol.14 No.2, pp.101-114.

Pruzan, P.(2015),”Further reflections on spirituality and spiritual-based leadership”, in

Zaolnai, L.(ed), The spiritual dimension of business ethics and sustainability management

Springer, Berlin, pp.187-190.

Randel, A.E., Dean, M.A., Ehrhart, K.H., Chung, B., and Shore, L.(2016),”Leader

inclusiveness, psychological diversity climate, and helping behaviors”,Journal of Managerial

Psychology, Vol.31 No.1, pp.216-234.

Reave,L.(2005),”Spiritual values and practices related to leadership effectiveness”,

Leadership Quarterly,Vol.16 No.5,pp.655-687.

Rego, A. and Cunha, M.P.(2008),”Workplace spirituality and organizational commitment:

An empirical study”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol.21 No.1,pp.53-75.

Rego,A., Cunha, M.P. and Oliveira,M.(2008),”Eupsychia revisited:The role of spiritual

leaders”,Journal of Humanistic Psychology,Vol.48 No.2,pp.165-195.

42

Roberson,Q.M.(2006),”Disentangling the meanings of diversity and inclusion in

organizations”,Group and Organization Management,Vol.31 No.2,pp.212- 236.

Sabharwal,M.(2014),”Is diversity management sufficient?Organizational inclusion to

further performance”,Public Personnel Management,Vol.43 No.2,pp.197-217.

Saks,A.M.(2011),”Workplace spirituality and employee engagement”,Journal of

Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.8 No.4, pp.317-340.

Scott,K.A., Heathcote,J.M. and Gruman,J.A.(2011),”The diverse organization:Finding gold

at the end of the rainbow”,Human Resource Management,Vol.50 No.6,pp.735-755.

Schaeffer, C.B. and Mattis, J.S.(2012),”Diversity, religiosity, and spirituality in the

workplace”, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.9 No.4, pp.317-333.

Sheep, M.L.(2006),”Nurturing the whole person: The ethics of workplace spirituality in a

society of organizations”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.66 No.4, pp.357-375.

Shore,L.M., Randel,A.E., Chung,B., Dean,M.A., Holcombe Ehrhart,K. and Singh,G.,

(2011),”Inclusion and diversity in work groups:A review and model for future research”,

Journal of Management,Vol.37 No.4,pp.1262-1289.

Sliter,M., Boyd,E., Sinclair,R., Cheung,J. and McFadden,A.(2014),”Inching toward

inclusiveness: Diversity climate, interpersonal conflict and well-being in women nurses”, Sex

Roles,Vol.71 No.1/2,pp.43-54.

Stewart,M.M., Crary,M. and Humberd,B.K.(2008),”Teaching value in diversity: On the

folly of espousing inclusion, yet practicing exclusion”,Academy of Management Learning and

Education,Vol.7 No.3,pp.374-386.

Stromeyer, W.R., Miller, J.W., Sriramachandramurthy, R. and DeMartino, R.(2015),”The

prowess and pitfalls of Bayesian structural equation modeling: Important considerations for

management research”, Journal of Management, Vol.41 No.2,pp.491-520.

Susmita,M. and Myra,D.(2013),”Diversity leadership: Empowering to make a difference”

, International Journal of Organizational Diversity,Vol.12 No.1,pp.25-33.

Sweeney,P.J. and Fry,L.W.(2012),”Character development through spiritual leadership”,

Consulting Psychology Journal,Vol.64 No.2,pp.89-107.

Tang,N., Jiang,Y., Chen,C., Zhou,Z., Chen,C.C. and Yu,Z.(2015),”Inclusion and inclusion

management in the Chinese context:An exploratory study”,International Journal of Human

Resource Management,Vol.26 No.6,pp.856-874.

43

Theodorakopoulos,N. and Budhwar,P.(2015),”Guest editors' introduction:Diversity and

inclusion in different work settings: Emerging patterns, challenges, and research agenda”,

Human Resource Management,Vol.54 No.2,pp.177-197.

Tourish,D. and Tourish, N.(2010),”Spirituality at work, and its implications for leadership

and followership:A post-structuralist perspective”,Leadership,Vol.6 No.2,pp.207-224.

Thomas,K.M., Tran,N.M. and Dawson,B.L(2010),”An inclusive strategy of teaching

diversity”,Advances in Developing Human Resources,Vol.12 No.3,pp.295-311.

Vallabh,P. and Singhal,M.(2014)”Workplace spirituality facilitation:A person-organization

fit approach”,Journal of Human Values,Vol.20 No.2,pp.193-207.

Wang, P., Rode, J.C., Shi, K., Luo, Z., and Chen, W.(2013),”A workgroup climate

perspective on the relationships among transformational leadership, workgroup diversity,

and employee creativity”, Group and Organization Management, Vol.38 No.3,pp.334-360.

Weinberg,F.J. and Locander,W.B.(2014),”Advancing workplace spiritual development:A

dyadic mentoring approach”,Leadership Quarterly,Vol.25 No.2,pp.391-408.

Wheeler,M.L.(2014),”Inclusion as a transformational diversity and business strategy”, in

Ferdman,B.M. and Deane,B.R.(eds),Diversity at work:The practice of inclusion.Wiley-

Blackwell, Oxford,pp.549-563.

Whitfield, D.(2014),”Servant-leadership with cultural dimensions in cross-cultural

settings”, in Selladurai, R.S. and Carraher, S.(eds), Servant leadership: Research and

practice, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp.48-70.

Wolfson,N., Kraiger,K. and Finkelstein,L.(2011).The relationship between diversity

climate perceptions and workplace attitudes.Psychologist-Manager Journal,14 (3):161-176.

Word, J.(2012),”Engaging work as a calling: Examining the link between spirituality and

job-involvement”,Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol.9 No.2,pp.147-166.

Wuffli, P.A.(2016).Inclusive leadership: A framework for the global era, Springer, Berlin.