Human Resources: Towards an Ecology of Soul In Work: Implications for Human Resource Development

Towards an Ecology of Soul In Work: Implications for Human Resource Development An ecology of soul in work involves understanding the deep and holistic relationship between the worker and the work environment. It is about how this relationship is experienced, and the meaning we make of our lives as workers. Within this perspective, HRD practitioners are called to attend to the dynamic, transactional nature of our relationships, and to the unconscious sources of energy within the individual and the collective which animate life within the organization. Over the last five years, we have witnessed a proliferation of books and articles on matters of spirit and soul in organizational life. Publications such as Reawakening the Spirit in Work, The Soul of a Business, Leading With Soul, and The Heart Aroused reflect a growing concern with what has come to be called the "spirituality of work." Among the most prominent issues within this discussion relevant to the practice of HRD is the meaning of work in our lives and its organization and structure. As Aktouf (1992) argues, "the human being is, by definition and necessity, a being whose destiny is meaning, intentions, and projects...a subject whose being is meaning and which has need of meaning" (p. 415). A spirituality of work draws our attention to the ways in which individuals experience work, its conditions, structure, organization, and its relation to the individual worker. Similar to the socio-technical systems perspective (Ketchum & Trist, 1992), this literature emphasizes the interactive nature of the relationship between worker and context. While this theme is prevalent in much of the recent "reformist" movement in business, a spirituality of work directs us more to matters of soul than strategy and technique. The idea of soul has become a powerful but dramatically different lens for viewing organizational and individual life. Soul invites us within the spaces that make up the interconnections among the work, the workers, and the context or environment, to both the pain of work as well as its joy. Soul is a way of seeing how our inner lives are intimately and inherently joined with the outer context. Grounded in the notion of work as inherently meaningful, the goal of an ecological approach to work is to bridge the gulf between the psychological and the organizational, to see the needs of the individual and the workplace as a continuum, to understand the "inner life" as intimately and deeply connected to and embedded within an "outer life." This perspective implies apprehending our lives as workers far different than the analytic or rational models which dominate much of HRD practice. The Problem of Meaning in Work A remarkable number of American workers report feelings of dissatisfaction with what they do for a living (Sinetar, 1987). Laden with the responsibilities of being increasingly task-oriented and productive, workers´ lives fill with the needs of every-day life. "Everywhere I go it seems people are killing themselves with work, busyness, rushing, caring, and rescuing. Work addiction is a modern epidemic and it is sweeping our land" (Fassel, quoted in Fox, 1994, p. 26). In his classic study of working men and women, Terkel (1972) vividly portrays how work can and does debilitate the human spirit: This book, being about work, is, by its very nature, about violence - to the spirit as well as to the body. It is about ulcers as well as accidents, about shouting matches as well as fist fights, about nervous breakdowns as well as kicking the dog . . . (p. xii) During a recent blizzard that brought worklife to a standstill on the northeast coast of the United States, a bank worker, playing in and enjoying the snows of New York''s Central Park, was asked by a National Public Radio reporter what she would be doing were it not for the blizzard. With a downcast tone in her voice, she bluntly replied "Working...bored to death." When we fail to use our work as fully as possible for our own development, enrichment, and sense of contribution, or when the nature of our work''s organization and structure makes such outcomes difficult, we become bored, frustrated, constrained, and dulled by what we do, robbed of energy and satisfaction. Our co-workers, neighbors, even our own experiences, provide abundant examples of how such frustrations are manifest: inattention to our work, clock watching, absenteeism, use and abuse of alcohol or drugs to cope with work stress, vague feelings of restlessness, irritability, and discontent. Worldwide, managers and workers lament a frightening decline in commitment and loyalty--both in terms of worker loyalty to an organization, and an organization''s loyalty to its workers; and workers themselves increasingly see their work as a never-ending struggling demanding they prove their worth constantly lest their names be on the next batch of pink slips. Overwhelmingly, organizations and HR practitioners tend to focus on behavioristic strategies to repair or correct what are generally seen as "worker problems." Such attempts can be readily seen in the pervasive use of such programs and strategies as work redesign, performance management systems, or re-engineering. Though the long-term effects of such efforts remain to be seen, evidence provided in research such as Ketchum & Trists´ suggests these efforts often produce heightened levels of anxiety, tension, depression, anger, and fatigue among workers. Work can, and too often does, serve as a force of alienation and dehumanization in one''s life (Aktouf, 1992; Hawley, 1993; Ketchum & Trist, 1992; Terkel, 1972). For many, work is seen as meaningless and often boring or dreadful, and workers gradually slip into a sense of "self-estrangement." Aktouf argues that "Alienation from work is the heart of the problem of workers'' commitment and motivation" (p. 418), a theme echoed by more "mainstream" theorists and organizational researchers. Even within HRD, typically perceived as the organizational domain most concerned with the "human issues," we encourage this sense of alienation by viewing the organization as an inanimate form, a mechanistic system involving the input, transformation, and output of resources and human capital. And in spite of our rhetoric, we tend to view the person at work as an object to be acted upon, to be somehow improved solely to promote organizational performance and profit. Not surprisingly, then, people attempt to find meaning for themselves apart from their work, to value work primarily as a means to live. Increased performance translates into increased purchasing power, resulting in what Fassel refers to as the "overworked American." Rather than indicating a sense of joy, loyalty or commitment to one''s work, this reflects a need to derive meaning from consuming and not from one''s work--creating a lifestyle, rather than creating a life. At one level, this problem of meaning in work could be considered a psychological issue, involving personal choice and personal decisions concerning what we will make of our lives, and not especially relevant to HRD concerns. There is evidence, however, that this is but one dimension, and that the ways in which we are socialized and culturalized in specific groups also impacts the outward expression of our inner lives. The problem of meaning in work extends beyond the psychological and is clearly linked to the ways in which work is structured and organized. Ketchum and Trist argue that "Commitment to work is still central to people''s lives, but the commitment is conditional on the work experience." Some managers are beginning to view such phenomena as poor work quality, lack of commitment, "Monday blues," or increased workplace violence as manifestations of a workforce that fails to view work as a vital component of their lives. Managers have implemented numerous strategies to address these concerns, including participatory management techniques such as self-management teams and total quality or continuous improvement efforts. Within these efforts continues to lie the assumption that people are not, in and of themselves, motivated to work, and that systems and controls must be implemented in order for people to work productively. Aktouf raises a critical, and often overlooked, consideration: rather than this technical focus on learning "how" to motivate workers, he asks whether it wouldn''t be better to spend time understanding "why" the worker is so little motivated. As he points out, "to raise the question in this way . . . is to question the very meaning of work." Work as Right Livelihood Work as right livelihood is an ecological view of work incorporating the contexts and processes of work, its structure and organization, as well as the psychology of the individual worker (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Fox, 1994). Such assumptions are embedded within existing frameworks of HRD such as self-directed work teams, job enrichment, and organizational democracy; companies experimenting with radical restructuring; organizational transformation; and the literature on a spirituality of work. A number of organizations recognize the need to attend to issues of meaning and how workers experience work. Within these workplaces, we are witnessing an emerging emphasis on the uncovering of a vital workforce, a workforce that works and creates with a spark of fire, with animation, and with purpose. At one time, and even continuing in many sectors today, one''s work was considered an expression of one''s spiritual life. Work was carefully chosen, with skills and craft cultivated and nurtured over a lifetime. Work as vocation, or calling, was seen as our demonstration of commitment to community and to the welfare of others. As the outer expression of our inner lives, work was often viewed as the central domain for one''s human development. These attributes characterize work as right livelihood, a notion at the center of a spirituality of work. In this view, work is a vital component of the human experience, laying important building blocks for one''s sense of self. Work as right livelihood conveys a particular relation of our selves to our work, and reflects a deep, inner capacity to see meaning in what we do, to approach our work as an expression of our inner self. It is about making our work an end in itself, rather than a means to an end. This "way of being" at work moves us towards our fullest participation in life, and embodies self-expression, commitment, mindfulness, and conscious choice. Right work responds to an essential human need: to be a part of something larger than oneself, to feel connected with others, to feel needed and valued, to somehow matter. Having a sense of a transcendent purpose--one that goes beyond oneself--provides us with a source of enthusiasm, energy, and goal. This is the essence of soul in work. In contrast, work without meaning is characterized as tired, ego-centered, competitive, manipulative, and cynical. The ways in which a company frames the nature of work and the role of the worker severely limits how readily we can bridge the inner life of the worker and the outer life of the organization. When we seek to develop and motivate the work force, to put life back into our lives--to work with soul--we are searching for a source of vitality. The dynamic and interactive nature of the relationship between worker and work demands that we attend not only to strategies for increased production and quality, but to the ways in which we work--the ways in which we experience and make meaning of our work and of ourselves as workers. To fully achieve this paradigmatic shift becomes a matter of developing an ecology of soul in work. Honoring the Soul in Work Facing the workplace and our work with soul is reflected, to greater or lesser degrees, in a number of conceptual and ideological focuses within existing organizational development literature. Each of these efforts contributes to an overall understanding of soul in work. For purposes of discussion, we refer to these efforts as humanist reforms, radical humanism, and the spirituality of work movement. Humanist Reform Efforts One of the most popular and pervasive attempts to address the problem of meaning in work has been the introduction of management techniques and strategies based on the Deming philosophy. Often overlooked in our worship of statistics, Deming''s quality management ideas in essence were a comprehensive approach to employee spirit and involvement. Many of his 14 management points reflect both a humanist influence and a response to the problem of meaning in work, including a constancy of effort, the transformation of Western-style management, a critical eye towards one''s work, the driving out of fear, and the removal of barriers that rob workers of pride in workmanship. Deming''s approach emphasized participatory management styles and numerous human resource innovations. But the heart of his philosophies for continuous quality improvement rested on the premise that organizational structures and procedures must appeal to workers'' talents, pride, and innate desires to work together, to cooperate, collaborate, and to create. Characteristics of a humanist perspective include, but are not limited to the authentic sharing of power and profit, less worker constraint, enhanced self-control over one''s work, an environment conducive to risk-taking, increased autonomy and responsibility, and the valuing of intuition, creativity, and emotion. Tenants of quality improvement rest on the need to drive fear out of the organization, constancy of purpose, commitment to a common vision, and the breaking down of structural barriers while affirming the diversity and value of individual contributions. These tenants are repeated Senge''s sense of the "learning organization," one which cultivates human capacity through valuing personal mastery, collaborative work, vision, and dialogue. Additional organizational theories and management models reflect similar ideas, such as McGregor''s assumptions of human nature and need for participative management, Maslow''s recognition of the need for self-esteem, self-actualization and self-transcendence, and DeVanna and Tichy''s concern for facility size, use of work groups, high levels of interaction with others, integrated diversity, and democratic processes. Many organizations and HR practitioners, however, have ignored the philosophical orientation that Deming and other humanists advanced, and instead turn philosophy and assumptions into technique and strategy, and implementing them piecemeal within an organization. Such a cafeteria approach to organizational development appears to have done little to reduce feelings of meaninglessness and discontent among workers, and employees are often suspicious of techniques such as "self-management teams" and "total quality improvement" efforts. Thus, the humanist reform efforts have consisted of a number of well-intended efforts to address problems of meaning and other related organizational concerns. Despite the call for a thorough reassessment of traditional views of work and the workplace, many "apparently have not seen the need to review the basic conceptual and ideological foundations on which these practices are based" (Aktouf, 1992, p. 408). The behavior of people continues to be viewed as the source of workplace problems. Characteristically, we are tempted to isolate these symptoms as individual problems and eradicate them one by one. This manner of thinking has led to such interventions as the need for externally-based motivational programs, the construction of surveillance systems, and the use of penalties and bonuses to discipline or reward, all of which ultimately serve to restrict rather than enhance spirit and development. Radical Humanism Radical humanists seem to have a better sense of the overriding philosophy needed for a revitalized workforce, and perhaps are more in keeping with a sense of soul in work. Drawing from Aktouf''s work with radical humanism, attributes which characterize this effort include a view of humans as being endowed with consciousness, right judgment, and free will; the idea that humans are fundamentally defined by our community and relations with others, who help us shape our sense of self; and that alienation through work lies at the heart of the process of dehumanizing people. We must recognize the primordial importance of what takes place, concretely, in the work process. The more radical perspective advocates the abandonment of management based on authority or on the scientism that is pervasive in the organizational field such as Taylorism, behavioral sciences, or management information systems. Only then will we begin to conceive of practices that permit the development of the worker''s desire to belong, to contribute, and to use his or her intelligence and creativity in the service of others. Radical humanists believe such goals can never be achieved so long as the conception and treatment of the worker as an instrument of production, as a "needs-driven mechanism," as a resource to be exploited and monitored, or as a cost to be controlled and minimized, prevails. The humanized firm focuses on the person more holistically, people who are driven by the desire to cooperate and to contribute, who will know how--and be allowed--to think, to react, and to modify, and who are characterized by greater autonomy, and equity. Such changes must be a "lived experience," neither contrived, commanded, nor appropriated, and must involve a change in the rules and the nature of power and control, rather than a change of technique. The radical humanist perspective illuminates the need for paradigmatic change in the ways in which we think about work and its meaning, due to inherent and inevitable conflicts between capital and labor. The spirituality of work literature, however, seems to subsume these views of both the humanist and radical humanist, but also serves to further illuminate the problem of meaning through its emphasis on the soul of organizational and worklife. A Spirituality of Work Unlike a prevailing tendency to locate problems of meaning or performance within individual workers, the emerging spirituality of work literature suggests that commitment to work depends as much on the way work is experienced as it does on the individual worker. Spirit and meaningfulness cannot thrive in an environment that induces anxiety and encourages reactiveness rather than proactiveness. Some organizations are recognizing this need to attend to the more spiritual dimensions of worklife. In a Business Week article, Galen and West described companies turning inward in search of a "soul" as a way to foster creativity and motivate leaders. These companies identify how, as a result of downsizings and reingineering, over-worked employees are asking, What does all this mean? Why do I feel so unfulfilled? With this heightened awareness of issues of meaning, there is an emerging emphasis placed on matters of the soul and spirit in organizational life--in the uncovering of a vital workforce capable of continuous adaptation and innovation. The literature on spirituality of work contributes to our understanding of the need for a "new order" of thinking about work and its organization. However, as De Gaulejac suggests, "Today it is as if the ''new managements'' were trying to transform the psychic drives feeding the individual''s narcissism into added work and an additional source of surplus value." In other words, this remarkable attention to a spirituality of work is sometimes justified in terms of "value added," denying the very soul that is struggling to survive within the workplace. Rather than seeing the problem as one of soul, many interpret this new emphasis on spirituality as one that suggests new "techniques" such as moments of quiet before board meetings, or yoga and meditation rooms. Along this line we see even conference titles such as Capturing the human spirit at work . . . The new competitive weapon. Thus, much of the attention to the spirituality of work continues to reflect a preoccupation with strategies rather than the need for a fundamentally different way of thinking about the meaning of work and how this meaning is reflected in organizational structures and processes. Towards an Ecology of Soul in Work An ecology of soul in work seeks to provide a framework for honoring the soul, to "arouse the soul," in work. Like the finger of the third ghost in A Christmas Carol, the growing concern with spirituality and meaning in our work and in the workplace points imperatively not to new value added techniques or strategies, but to matters of soul. Building on Aktouf''s call for a radical humanism in the workplace, we argue that concern for soul in work calls us to a new order, a fundamental shift in how we understand the meaning of work in our lives. While Aktouf''s analysis significantly contributes to our understanding of the problem of individual meaning in work, soul directs us to the importance of both the inner and the outer aspects of work, and to its collective as well as its individual dimensions. In an ecology of soul perspective, we "cease to understand or see ourselves as isolated and narrow competing egos and begin to identify with other humans....and...beyond humanity to include the nonhuman world" (Naess, 1985, p. 67). Viewing work from this perspective places primacy within the workplace on development and growth of both the individual and community, rather than on simply the costs and profits of the organization. The ideas of such writers as Matthew Fox, Moore , or the poet spiritualists such as David Whyte describe that to work with soul challenges the status quo of the Western world. It demands an inner strength and is founded upon ideas of community and connectedness with others. An ecology of soul recognizes and values the interconnection between the quality of the inner work and the outer work we do, an expressed joy in work, and the drive and opportunity to work authentically and with mutual respect. Hallmarks of working with soul include the use of self-organizing systems, the opportunity to work with spontaneity and freedom, and to be treated with life-affirming dignity. There is a need for face-to-face communication, participatory processes, shared authority, power, and profits, and the opportunity to foster meaningful interpersonal relationships. Both research and anecdotal evidence indicate that worklife is often filled with considerable emotional discomfort and psychic pain, as well as sheer physical pain. An ecology of soul does not assume the complete elimination of such pain and conflict . . . it´s not a panacea to worklife ills. Rather, an ecology of soul seeks what to do with the pain, unlike most HRD trends which seek to do something about pain and discomfort in work. According to Sardello, "political, social, economic, ecological, and technological programs will not alter the condition of the world one wit; they only rearrange what is already given into new patterns." Such a rearrangement implies a need for individuals to do their own inner work and to nurture deep meaning with respect to how we direct our energy. But it also asks of business to cultivate an inward organizational consciousness in an environment of openness, safety, and trust. Implications for HRD Practice As Hawley described in the early 90s, key concerns for leaders are no longer simply issues of task and structure but are issues of spirit and soul. This holds even greater importance as we enter the new millennium. This is not to suggest that issues of productivity, structure, and profits, are no longer critical, but rather that we concern ourselves more fully with the humanness and health of our organizations. Is this unrealistic in the "hard" world of work? Growing evidence from the business world suggests not. Voices of companies embracing spirit and soul within the workplace are rising as a growing number begin to understand the importance of the context of work and how workers experience and make meaning of their lives as workers. Examples of such places include international organizations such as Semco and Sun Hydraulics Corporation, the Quebec pulp and paper multinational, Cascades, Inc., and the American plant, Johnsonville Sausage Company. Tom´s of Maine. Other workplaces are beginning to experiment with new work environments that openly speak of soul, such as Boeing, AT&T, Lotus Development, and Medtronic. Outcomes of such experiments are variable, and critics of course abound. Yet it appears that an ecology of soul is possible . . . a workplace can promote high productivity as well as transcendent values, and Human Resource professionals can work to develop people by helping them find transcendent meaning in their work. We are perhaps not so far from developing an ecology of soul in work as some might think. Similar characteristics are already evident in existing organizational development literature, where changing the status quo demands a more critical and holistic perspective. Senge suggests that we adopt a more Gestalt perspective, in contrast to the analytic and reductionist perspectives that predominate the field, and locate work within contexts that extend beyond the immediacy of the balance sheet and the needs and characteristics of the physical plant. Organizational transformation also reflects this desire to move beyond the constraints of highly technical interpretations of how workplaces are structured and organized. Adams stresses the multiple perspectives and interconnectedness within a new paradigm which emphasizes an expanded sense of identity and an awareness of the interconnectedness of people in their organizations, and of organizations to each other in the larger environment. Ketchum and Trist suggest that attention needs to be given to attending to and changing the ways in which workers experience work, rather than trying to re-shape or replace workers themselves. This thinking leads to considerations of the nature of work that engenders commitment among employees. Work can provide a means of allowing the varied and complex aspects of our personality to emerge and flourish. Working with soul reflects energy, transcending the ego, cooperation, freedom, and joyfulness, and demands an environment free from fear, guilt, and the perpetuation of self-defeating thought and behavioral patterns. It involves a total belief system that emphasizes responsibility, accountability, and connectedness--a sense that each worker is an integral part of something larger than him or herself. It means ridding ourselves of the idea that organized groups of people are pieces of property, to be bought and sold according to market price, and as costs and constraints which we instinctively seek to reduce. HRD has long recognized the workplace as a context for fostering worker growth and development, and to enhance organizational effectiveness through the integration of structural, human, and strategic issues and practice. Because of a practice focused on the inter- and intra-unit relationships within an organization, HRD practitioners are well-positioned to cultivate an ecology of soul in work, to become more conscious of the inner lives of our organizations and how workers experience their lives as workers. Moving towards an ecology of soul, we must begin to view the work organization for what it is--a human collective with human characteristics--and tie the organization closer to the human condition, subject to the principles of human existence. Only then can we cultivate an organizational form where, as Aktouf describes, candor, symmetry, equity, and sharing provide the grounds for humanizing the workplace. Conclusion Meeting the challenges that face the workplace today depends upon the involvement of the many, a fully integrated organization, increased experimentation, the elimination of boundaries, and the free-flowing exchange of communication, information, and knowledge. Cultivating an ecology of soul will assist HRD practitioners to navigate in the face of environmental uncertainty and enhance an organization''s ability to absorb change. Numerous forces are influencing the direction of HRD, including heightened expectations by organizations of workers for decision-making, creativity, risk taking, and adaptation to change, and higher expectations by workers for meaningful work and the right to fully participate in shaping work processes and outcomes. Rather than continuing our more traditional efforts to eliminate symptoms of meaninglessness in work, what is needed is greater dialogue concerning how to assist organizations to evolve in a way that honors imagination and creativity, personal and collective challenge, and other multifaceted dimensions of an ecology of soul. At its heart, this implies new ways of nurturing organizational development and culture. Before such dialogue can result in any meaningful and practical accomplishment, however, we must increase our understanding of what contributes to a sense of meaningfulness in our work. Certain conditions are necessary to infuse work with soul, to allow an ecology of soul to emerge within our workplaces. To some extent these conditions are illuminated within the spirituality of work and organizational development literature. There is a need, however, to further assess the structures and processes within the workplace that enhance personal growth and development, encourage cooperative and democratic work, that eliminate fear in the worker, and communicate messages that value our intrinsic natures. " John M. Dirkx and Terri A. Deems 1996, 2000 References Adams, J.D. (Ed.) (1984). Transforming work. Alexandria, VA: Miles River Press. Aktouf, O. (1992). Management and theories of organizations in the 1990s: Toward a critical radical humanism? Academy of Management Review, 17(3), pp. 407-431. Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1995). Leading with soul. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1991). Reframing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bowen, D., & Lawler III, E. (Spring, 1992). Total quality-oriented human resources management. Organizational Dynamics, 20(4), 29-41. Carnevale, A.P. (1991). America and the new economy. ASTD Press. Chappell, T. (1993). The soul of a business: Managing for profit and the common good. New York: Bantom. Conger, J.A. (1994). Spirit at work: Discovering the spirituality in leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Corson, D. (Ed.). (1991). Education for work: Background to policy and curriculum. Philadelphia: The Open University. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. New York: HarperPerennial. Deming, W. (1982). Quality, productivity, and competitive advantage. Cambridge: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study. Fassel, D. (1990). Working ourselves to death. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Fletcher, B.R. (1990). Organization transformation theorists and practitioners. New York: Praeger. Fox, M. (1994). The reinvention of work: A new vision of livelihood for our time. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Galen, M., & West, K. (1995, June 5). Companies hit the road less traveled: Can spirituality enlighten the bottom line? Business Week, 82-83. Handy, C. (1994). The age of paradox. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Hawley, J. (1993). Reawakening the spirit in work. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kaftan, C., & Barnes, L. (1991). Sun Hydraulics Corporation. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Kanter, R.M. (1991). Transcending business boundaries: 12,000 world managers view change. Harvard Business Review (May-June), 151-164. Ketchum, L.D., & Trist, E. (1992). All teams are not created equal: How employee empowerment really works. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Larkin, T.J. (Spring, 1986). Humanistic principles for organizational management. Central States Speech Journal, 37(1), 36-44. McKnight, R. (1984). Spirituality in the workplace. Transforming Work: A Collection of Organizational Transformation Readings. J. Adams (Ed.). Alexandria, VA: Miles River Press. Moore, T. (1991). Care of the soul: A guide for cultivating depth and sacredness in everyday life. New York: HarperCollins. Roskind, R. (1992). In the spirit of business: A guide to resolving fears and creating harmony in your worklife. Berkeley, CA: Celestial Arts. Roszak, T. (1992). The voice of the earth: An exploration of ecopsychology. New York: Simon & Schuster. Sardello, R. (1992). Facing the world with soul. New York: HarperPerennial. Semler, R. (1993). Maverick: The success story behind the world''s most unusual workplace. New York: Warner Books. Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Sinetar, M. (1987). Do what you love, the money will follow: Discovering your right livelihood. New York: Paulist Press. Terkel, S. (1974). Working. New York: Ballantine. Welton, M. (1991). Toward development work: The workplace as a learning environment. Deaken University Press. Whyte, D. (1994). The heart aroused: Poetry and the preservation of the soul in corporate America. New York: Doubleday.