Many organizations offer “spiritual wellness” programs that soothe but never transform.
In workplaces seeking solutions to burnout, conflict, and disconnection, spiritual language has become an attractive tool. However, when spirituality is used to comfort employees without addressing the structures that harm them, it risks becoming just another way to uphold the status quo. This essay reveals how corporate spirituality can hide systemic harm, reinforce profit-driven hierarchies, and silence deeper calls for justice. True spirituality must challenge, rather than soften, unjust systems. Managers, educators, and faith-based organizations have a crucial role in making a difference.
For many workers, spirituality provides a cushion against the pressures and dangers of modern work. It can help reduce inner fatigue, isolation, and a sense of meaningless work (Jurkiewicz & Giacalone, 2004). However, these advantages often fall short when spirituality is used for profit rather than well-being. Workplace spirituality programs may be implemented in superficial, unhelpful, and neoliberal ways (Driscoll & Wiebe, 2007), focusing more on appearances than real change. Human resources development (HRD) departments sometimes promote spirituality that makes employees feel good while ignoring underlying issues. Spirituality is used as a cover for problems like overwork, inequality, and poor management (Fenwick & Lange, 1998). In such cases, spirituality becomes a way to mask dissatisfaction so employees can return to work more obedient, calmer, and more productive.
Indeed, workplace spirituality is often justified by its ability to enhance productivity (Garcia-Zamor, 2003), even though financial gain has no place in accepted definitions of spirituality. This dynamic reveals a deep tension. Some scholars argue for a form of spirituality that challenges capitalism’s extraction and competition (Bell, 2008) and encourages organizations to prioritize people and values over profits (Agbim et al., 2013). The question for today’s leaders is clear: Are we using spirituality to maintain the system or to challenge it?
This distinction lies in the difference between technical and critical workplace spirituality. Technical spirituality involves “going through the motions,” offering feel-good practices without fostering deeper change, while critical spirituality genuinely seeks to “explain all the circumstances that enslave human beings” (Wolf & Feldbauer-Durstmüller, 2023). Brooks and Ezani’s (2021) case study of a private Islamic school shows how a leader’s critical spirituality can shape leadership practices rooted in social justice, gender justice, and pluralism. Their framework, grounded in critical consciousness, reflection, and love, illustrates how spirituality can serve as a force for equity rather than mere compliance.
Shah’s (2022) ethnography of justice-focused educators further develops this idea. Using a spiritual dialogic approach that encourages trust and vulnerability, educators incorporate spirituality into justice work. Although not explicitly connected, Duchon and Ashmos’ (2005) framework of workplace spirituality, focused on relationships, inner experiences, and meaning, underpins Shah’s findings. Here, spirituality enhances understanding of self and community; promotes healing through relational spaces; fosters embodied, reflective engagement; and sees interconnectedness as a core element for professional growth.
Critical spirituality extends beyond organizational frameworks to personal healing. It promotes deep reflection on meaning (Bell, 2008) and places trauma within its social context. Healing occurs through collaborative, reflective processes that foster agency and connect personal and social justice (Gardener, 2022). Wolf and Feldbauer-Durstmüller (2023) demonstrate how this form of spirituality opens up space for alternative management practices by blending spiritual, ethical, and critical perspectives.
These approaches differ significantly from technical spirituality, which maintains hierarchical boundaries and discourages authentic connections across levels of power (Driscoll & Wiebe, 2007). Decolonized workplace spirituality, however, promotes connection across hierarchical and environmental boundaries (Payne & Calton, 2004; Cajete, 1994).
The final theme focuses on resisting colonial capitalism. Although capitalism varies greatly, it fundamentally depends on private profit and wage labor (Harris & Delanty, 2023). Ul-Haq (2020) argues that capitalism has hijacked workplace spirituality to promote productivity, and instead calls for Indigenous spirituality to create humane workplaces. Fenwick and Lange (1998) observe how corporate spirituality often exploits human desire, offering a “hurry-up-and-feel-good” version of spiritual life that avoids struggle. Colonial violence (Khan & Naguib, 2019) has long suppressed Indigenous wisdom, but this wisdom could be essential for healing and dismantling oppressive systems (Ul-Haq, 2020; Gonzalez, 2016).
For managers, educators, and faith-based leaders, the challenge is to reject comforting spiritual facades and adopt transformative, justice-focused spirituality. Only then can workplaces become places of liberation instead of tools of harm.
Have you ever seen spirituality “misused” in work or another organization? Leave a comment below and tell me about it!
Joshua David Kingsley 