Spirituality in Public Service: A Dialogue Author(s): Willa Bruce and John Novinson Reviewed work(s): Source: Public Administration

Review, Vol. 59, No. 2 (Mar. - Apr., 1999), pp. 163-169 Published by: Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/977636 . Accessed: 11/10/2012 18:18
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley-Blackwell and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review.

http://www.jstor.org

John
When I read your essay, I was far from comfortablewith the idea that spirituality a missing ingredientin publicseris vice. You anticipatesome of my feelings when you discuss the reluctance of some to even entertainthe idea. I even find it difficult begin framingquestions. Perhaps the first to problemis the abstractnatureof the suggestion. Each time I try to operationalizethe concept, I run into unpleasant options. For example, we, like many communities, are looking at ways to revitalize our central business area. As a relativelyadvantaged community,the motivation has more to do witha sense of place and aesthetic concerns for the advocates of change while those opposed are concerned about the rightof individual propertyowners to controltheirown destiny. As staff we are focused on a value: providinga process and services that ends with both sides willingand ready to say they were treated fairly. As such, we try hard to put aside many other values and judgementsthat interferewiththe primary goal. I wonder how providing a safe haven for "spirituality" mightaffect an already difficult environment. Can you help me better understandyour idea by relatingit to this example or some othertangiblecircumstance? John

Sphituality

hin

Public

Sernice:

Dialogue

Willa Bruce John Novinson

WillaBruce, academic, an wrotea shortessay spirituality on in publicadministration, Novinson, villagemanager, John a read theessay responded WillaBruce. Theirdialogue and to is here. Editor reprinted

Willa
Hi John, Yes, spirituality is an abstract concept-much easier to talk about than to operationalize I expect. So, before tackling how one might apply spirituality to the dilemma you posed, let me see if I can make the notion of spirituality at work more concrete. When I talk about spirituality, I'm defining it as a "search for meaning and values, which includes some sense of the transcendent." That is, some force or life energy beyond ourselves that is often identified with religions, but which may be simply a sense of interconnectedness with others and a desire to make meaning and live out one's own values about good and wrong. Elements of spirituality that I think can empower us in the government workplace are: 1. A call to integrity-that is, a self expectation that one will make an effort to discern right from wrong, act on the discernment of right, and say openly that one is acting on one's own understanding of right. It sounds to me like you do that, when you say that you want the resolution of what will happen to your downtown area to result in both sides feeling they were treated fairly. 2. Relationships-that is a recognition that people are intricately connected to one another and that each action has a ripple effect. When you refer to you and

PublicAdministration Review* March/April 1999,Vol. 59, No. 2

163

your staff as "we" you are expressing a sense of relationship. Your concern over how citizens with opposing views might feel about the outcome of the downtown dilemma says to me that you're concerned about relationships. If you weren't, you'd just say something like, "I don't care what anyone thinks, I've decided based on my expertise that X or Y is the best decision, and that's what I'll do." 3. Love-the kind of love that emerges from spirituality is what the Greeks called "philio" or brotherly love and "agape"charity. Love in the workplace calls us to do unto others as we'd hope they do for us. Your concern for an outcome of fairness suggests to me that you yourself value fairness and want to ensure that it exists for others. I expect you have other values as well that guide your sense of what is "right." Spiritual persons simply make decisions and act based on their sense of how others should be treated. That may be easier for someone in positions such as yours and mine where we have some measure of discretion and authority in our jobs. It may be more difficult for someone in a position where he or she is expected to implement a decision, rather than make it. I do think, however, that if one cannot act out of love and integrity on the job, one ought to reconsider one's place of employment. 4. Search for meaning-A search for meaning involves seeing the "big picture." It tries to make sense of sometimes senseless happenings and wrongful acts. It requires that one ask what problems need new solutions; it asks how issues are interconnected and what unspiritual thoughts are contributing to problems. It requires an expectation that meaning may come from diverse places and that others may make different meanings from the same situation. When you wonder how providing a safe haven for spirituality might affect an already difficult environment, I think you are searching for meaning and trying to make sense of a tough situation. Searching for meaning enables us to link our outer work with our inner work. Inner work is what we do to promote self-development and growth. I guess if I were to summarize all this, I'd say that spirituality at work means simply living out one's own deep values. In the public sector we've often been expected to attempt to separate facts from values and deal with the facts alone. Spiritual persons recognize that "facts" are tempered by perceptions, biases, and world-views. Spiritual persons have the courage to speak from their own deeply held values and to listen to and respect the values of others, even when they are in conflict. I don't think spirituality will solve our problems. I think it will change the way problems are perceived, and change the way we deal with one another. Now to your specific question-how might spirituality affect an already difficult environment? Difficult environments occur whether or not one is spiritual. Spiritual persons deal with them differently. They look for shared values, celebrate the diversity and

interconnectednessthe peopleinvolved theirdifof and feringworld-views, they treatthe personsinvolved and with the kind of charity love they hope for themand selves. They try to makemeaning of the difficulty, out asking suchquestions "What I learnfromthis?" as, can "Howcan I help?" "Whoelsecan help?""Whowill be hurtandwho will be helpedby this or that decision?" Spiritual persons remain true to theirown deeplyheld so convictions, thatothers lookat themandsay,"you can knowwhere willstand." always they Spiritual persons morelikelyto put difficult are issues in perspective. They mayaskquestions suchas, "What canI learn fromthis?" is God (however "What transcendence perceived) is tryingto teachme?" "HowcanI usewhatI'mlearning here, to preventor solve this same difficulty in the future?" Spiritualpersonsare more likely to deal with one out another of love (brotherly love/charity).They are morelikelyto be patient, respectful, empowering. and However, spiritual persons as humanas everyone are else. They are not perfect,and bad thingshappento them,too. The mainreason be spiritual, think,is to I thatspirituality hope. offers I hopethissparks somemoreof yourthoughts. Willa

John
HelloWilla: It is difficult be "uncomfortable" a definitionof spirito with tuality when it is crafted in so appealing and compelling a manner. Yet I find that the applicationof individualspiritual values does not always manifest itself in a benign and supportive manner. I cannot "define out" spiritualconvictions that there may be inferiorand superior races cultures and motives. I do not know how I can distinguish between the applicationof deeply held beliefs that may conflict with our fundamental mission. How do I deal withan employee who's values are in conflictwithour mission? spiritual Why is spiritualitysuperior to professionalism, fairness, and respect when it comes to publicservice? Let's return the sample problem. In our redevelopment to area, there is a propertyowner who resists change. Emotional attachement to the propertyprevents the owner from consideringany sale or change to it. It is a key locationand the leadershipof the communitybelieves that the welfare of the community injured this blightedpropertyis not includis if ed in the redevelopment. Let'ssay that we have encouraged employees to incorporate theirspirituality theirworkand that a key member of into our team is deeply committed to this philosophy and even 100 percent consistent with your ideal. How is that person going to functionin this situation? Willhe or she empathize so strongly with the passionate resistance of the property owner that he or she will be compelled toward conflict with the rest of the team? Willit be more difficult deal withconto

164

Public Administration * March/April Vol.59,No. 2 Review 1999,

fidential information that conflicts with such values? Will intense empathy give incorrectimpressions of the community's determination? Will this lead to a larger problem because the owner is encouraged? Now, we tend to value a team that sees problems and works towardsolutions. We are comfortablewith lookingfor because it is win/winsolutions but if one view point is "right" consistent with deeply held values of spiritualsignificance because it is in oppositionto those and the other is "wrong" values, I can see everythinggetting a littlemore difficult for everyone. This may seem like an argument for the Pontius Pilate school of management. Maybe it is. But, the issues get tougher withoutsome dispassionate distancing. I am a "professional" manager. I recall Max Weber being an advocate of separating policy and administration.That requiressome toning down of passions. Good administrators need a fairly large range of tolerance when it comes to policies, especially in a multi-cultural, diverse democracy. Professionalismdoes not requireindifferenceand it does not exclude empathy. It does make the commitmentto the organizationand the task at hand primary.Itoften requiresa good sense of the opportunitiesfor compromise. Even the best spiritual values can aggravate problemsolving. And the best values do not necessarily present themselves. Historytells us that trulyterriblespiritual values can find their way into too much of life. One does not need to look too long or far to find a "spiritually" motivatedinquisition. Consider the Talibanin Afghanistanand the spiritually motivated militiashere in America. Well, I have violated my own determination keep this to short. I look forward hearingfromyou. to John

I cannot define awayconvictionsabout inferiority and superiorityeither. I do not, however,see such convictions as spiritual. They are doctrinaireand separatist. is Spirituality interconnected and inclusive. While some religioustraditionsarguefor their own superiority, these are intellectual biasesnot spiritualconvictions. Elements of spirituality are: 1) interconnectedness, integrity,3) love, 4) search 2) for meaning,and 5) sense of the transcendent. Each of these elements can be found in the spiritualwisdom of most sacredscriptures. These elements of spiritualitycall everyoneinto relationship,not into divisiveness.Differencesof cultureand motivesbecomesecondary enriching. and
I do not know how I can distinguish between the application of deeply held beliefs that may conflict with our fundamental mission. How do I deal with an employee who's spiritual values are in conflict with our mission?

Will
Hi John! I would not want to create discomfort. I do want, however, to generate thinking about spirituality and the public service. You and I appear to view spirituality through different lenses. Your worry that the "application of spiritual values does not always manifest itself in a benign and supportive manner" sounds to me like you think of spirituality as the icing on a cake-not necessary,not always nice. To me spirituality is a part of the cake, itself. Cakes are made of flour, baking powder, butter, eggs, sugar, milk, and salt. All are inexplicably intertwined and necessary for full flavor. Spirituality is like the salt in the cake. One could have cake without it, but the cake would taste flat, not quite cake, but not bread either. I cannot "define out" spiritual convictions that there may be inferior and superiorraces cultures

Depends on what your mission is. If its focus is on the growth and development of your city or of specific areas in it, I'd have a hard time seeing how spirituality might conflict with that. Spiritual persons might approach accomplishing the mission differently. More about this when I respond to your sample problem below. The only place I can see spiritual values conflicting with the mission would be if the mission was inherently corrupt. A ready example is always the Nazi regime during WWII. A great deal of documentation exists to suggest that good people did horrible things because they followed orders rather than their conscience. Suppose those who believed in love, interconnectedness, integrity, meaning, and transcendence had just said "No."
Why is spirituality superior to professionalism, fairness, and respect when it comes to public service?

It isn't. I don't claim that there's a hierarchy of values with spirituality at the top of the list. If we stick with the cake metaphor, it's easy to see that there's not a hierarchy of ingredients in a cake. Neither milk nor flour nor sugar are superior-they're all necessary. Alone, each tastes pretty awful. Stirred together with a little salt and baked, they are transformed.
Let's return to the sample problem. In our redevelopment area, there is a property owner who resists change. He/She will not consider any sale or change in his/her property for emotional attachment reasons. The property occupies a

andmotives.

key locationand the leadershipof the community

SpiritualityPublic in Service: Dialogue A

165

believes that the welfare of the community is injured if this blighted property is not included in the redevelopment.

What we have here is an economicdevelopmentproblem, not a spiritualone and I cannot presumeto speak for all spiritualpersonsin my responseto it. So, I'll simply tell you how I'd handleit. I'll try to makeit a spiritual response. It will certainlycome out of my own values, which push me to affirmthe dignity and worth of each personinvolvedin a dilemmaand to work for a win-win solution. It'sbeen my experiencethat complexproblems rarelyhave only one solution I don't think there is "one bestway"to dealwith this one. A small town with which I am familiarhad a similar problemrecently. In the heartof downtownwas a building that housed a long-time family business. The building accidentally caughton fire and burnedto the ground. The family wanted to rebuild. The public officials, includingthe manager, wanted the areafor a parkinglot. A lot of rhetoric,infusedwith a lot of emotion,went into the debate over the now and future use of this land. Let's say that we have encouraged employees to While the debate still raged,with hurtful words hurled incorporate their spirituality into their work and from both sides, the problem was "solved"by the city. that a key member of our team is deeply commitThe city council condemned the building, claimedemited to this philosophy and even 100 percent connent domain, and early one morning, while it was still sistent with your ideal.... dark,a city bulldozerleveledit. That was certainlyone solution. It was not the only I don't reallythink you need to encourageemployees one. In my opinion it was far from the best, and I think to incorporate their spirituality into their work. I think a spiritualperson would have handled the situationdif- that personswho havespiritual valuesalreadydo. I think ferently. you just need to recognizethat and be open to including Valuesthat are apparentto me in the town'ssolution valuesas a partof policy decisions. In public administraareefficiency, legalrightsof the city, and economicdevel- tion, we've long talked about the fact-value debate. I opment. I cannot help but wonder what the decision really don't think facts exist in isolation from values. would have been had the valuesbeen interconnectedness Indeed, when people disagreeover what actions should with the building owners, heritageof the town, caring, be taken,the disagreement likelyrootedin a valuesperis responsiveness, yes, economicdevelopment. and, spectiveand spiritual valuesarea partof that perspective. What would I have done as the city manager? would I have initiated a discernmentprocess in which all those How is that person going to function in this situaconcerned could freely, in a nonjudgmental forum, tion? expresstheir views and be heard. I'd encouragea collective cost-benefit analysiswhich included the "rational" I don'tknow. If we eliminatespirituality from the perdata of the city and the personalconcernsof the building son'scalculus,can you predicthow a personunknownto owner. I would haveworkedfor solutionwhich involved you will act?People are so marvelously complex, they're the building owners, saved their pride, yet ultimately full of surprises! movedthe city ahead. One way to do this is described in However,I do believethat a trulyspiritualperson (i.e. BeyondMajority Rule by MichaelSheeran,S.J. (Philadel- one committedto interconnections, integrity, love, search phia: Philadelphia yearly meeting, 1983). It offers a for meaning, and sense of the transcendent)will speak quakerapproach decisionmakingin controversial to situ- out againstclearlyevil acts. I also suspect that spiritual ations. persons are predictable. If you think about your staff The key to this type of solution generationis mutual right now, you can probablyname who will consistently respectand a commitment to trying to understandthe take the side of the under-dog,take the time to express other's position. Leonard Swidler offers ten rules for caringwhen times are tough, and generallycome down interideological dialogue that can furtherguide the dis- on the side of overallfairness responsiveness. and cussion ("The Dialogue Decalogue: Ground Rules for Youmay even knowwho takesthe time to pray. Interreligious, Intercultural Dialogue"(in L. Bade, Envisioning a Global Ethic. Philadelphia:Global Dialogue Will theyempathize strongly the passionso with Institute,1997). ate resistance the property of ownerthattheywill
166 * Public Administration Review March/April Vol.59,No.2 1999,

Would the solution after all this be any different? Maybe, maybe not. The difference would be in the decreasein frustration and increasein acceptanceof the solution by all participants.A basictenet of leadership is that "people acceptwhat they help to create." What has this approach do with spirituality? recto It ognizes the interconnectedness all participantsin the of situation, it offers a way to approachthe situation with love and integrity. It encouragesparticipantsto make personalmeaningof the decision,to look for a redeeming granderpurpose beyond a decision about one or a few buildings,and throughit all to see God's hand at work improvinglives. To be a spiritual person means to know and live accordingto the knowledgethat God is presentto us in grace as the principle of personal, interpersonal, and social transformation. Being open to the spirit is to acceptwho one is and who one is calledto become, then directone'slife accordingly-that is what it meansto live with integrity.

be compelled towardconflictwith the rest of the team? Willthey find it more difficult deal with to confidential informationthat conflicts with their values? Can they empathize so much that they willgive incorrectimpressionsof the community's Willthis lead to a largerproblem determination? because the owner is encouraged?

lems and workstowardsolutions.

Me Too!
We are comfortablewith lookingfor win/winsolutions but if one view point is urightn because it is consistent withdeeply held values of spiritual significanceand the other is "wrong" because it is in oppositionto those values, I can see everything gettinga littlemore difficult everyone. for

Spiritualpersonsare personsof integrity. This means they live out theirvaluesand "practice what they preach." I thinkyou'reaskingseveral questionshere: Will a spiritualperson identify with propertyowners By now you know that I believethat spirituality not is overcity administration? about "wrong"and "right."It is about interconnectedI'dsay no more than a nonspiritual personmight. ness, integrity, love, searchfor meaning,and sense of the Will a spiritualperson be able to hold informationin transcendent.It is aboutliving one'svalueswherever one confidence? is, but it is not aboutimposingthose valueson others. I'dcertainlyhope so! I think you expressvery well the fearsthat many have Will a spiritualpersonput the wantsof individualciti- wheneverone talksabout spirituality. It often arisesout zens abovethose of the community? of religiousconvictionsand often religiouszealotstry to No more than a nonspiritual person. convert others to their way of thinking. I think I can I think the differencebetween spiritualpersons and best respond at this point by quoting Mclaughlin and nonspiritual will be that spiritualpersonsare more likely Davidson in their 1994 book called SpiritualPolitics(p. to attempt to make meaning of the issues and the deci- 164-65): "Historically, greatabusesoccurredwhen chrissions and see them in a greater context. tianity becamea state religion. That is why in the early Let me use a personal,nonwork relatedexample. A days of our nation, our founding fatherslegislatedfreefew weeks ago, a man drivinga huge blazerhit the back- dom of religionand no establishment a state religion. of end of my car while I was at a gas station,pumpingfuel But was it their intention to relegatespiritualvaluessoleinto my gas tank. He hit my carhardenough to dent the ly to the religioussphereand excludespiritualand moral bumperand knock me into my car door. I was furious, considerations-and the sacreddimension of life-from but not hurt. I asked him why he hit my car. He public affairs? This seems highly unlikely since many of responded,"because werein my way." you them evidenceda profound belief and faith in a higher A nonspiritual personwould have been as furiousand power. probablyshouted the same obscenitiesI did. A nonspiritual person would have also written down his license This may seem like an argumentfor the Pontius plate numberand calledand reportedit to the police as I Pilate school of management. Maybe it is. But, did. The difference comes next. As a persontryingto be the issues get tougher withoutsome dispassionspiritual, I prayed for the man and tried to search for ate distancing. what I could learn about myself and humankindfrom the incident. I am workingat forgivinghim. I do not think you are "washingyour hands"of the I think this incident shows that the same events hap- issue. On the contrary,your efforts to raise important pen to the spiritualand nonspiritualalike. The differ- issuesenrichmy own thinkingand will be a realassetto ence is in how the event is handled. the thinkingof others! Seems to me that the majorissue in your questionsis one of trust. I think what you'rereallysaying is "canI I am a professional' manager. I recall Max trusta spiritualpersonto be a good/trustworthy/dependWeber being an advocate of separating policy ablepersonwho is committedto the city,to fellowworkand administration. ers, to me?" I hope so. Me too. But this begs the question. Both politicians However,I have met people who claim they have the and administrators be spiritual. A very recentgallup can in "truth" termsof religionand spirituality, that that poll (reportedin 1997) found that 95 percentof Ameriand somehowgivesthem claim to greater knowledgethan any cans believein some form of higherpowerand that more of the rest of us. I call that "fauxspirituality." great than ever beforewe are seeking spiritualhelp for tough The spiritualtraditionssharea common awe of mysteryand a decisions. common search for wisdom. They are about making ones self and the world a betterplace,but not aboutdenThat requiressome toning down of passions. igratingnor harmingothers. Goodadministrators a fairly need largerangeof tolerance whenit comes to policiesespeciallyin Now, we tend to value a team thatsees probmulti-cultural, diversedemocracy.
in SpiritualityPublic A Service: Dialogue 167

Professionalism does not require indifference and it does not exclude empathy. It does make the commitmentto the organizationand the task at hand primary. It often requiresa good sense of the opportunitiesfor compromise. Even the best spiritual values can aggravate problemsolving. As I understand this, you're saying that professional administrators must commit themselves totally to the employing agency or level of government. I, too, believe that professional administrators are fiduciaries of the public trust. They must be responsive to regime values (Rohr) and they must hold the values of the american people: accountability, efficiency, responsiveness, and responsibility (Klingner and Nalbandian). I argue that all of this is necessary, but insufficient, for it ignores the innate spirituality of humankind. I claim that it's time to quit pretending that people do not have a spiritual dimension and that an open acknowledgment of that part of humankind will enrich and empower the public service. And the best values do not necessarily present themselves. History tells us that truly terrible spiritualvalues can find their way into too much of life. One does not need to look too long or far to find a "spiritually" motivatedinquisition. Consider the Talibanin Afghanistanand the spiritually motivatedmilitiashere in America. This seems to me more self-serving power than spirituality. The Taliban are an ethnic group and many good Moslems in Afghanistan claim that they're interpreting the laws of the Koran in a biased way based on their ethnic heritage. This seems like an attempt to assert authority, not a manifestation of spirituality. Similarly, American militias who claim religious justification, are using a very narrow interpretation of the Bible. These are ideological movements that use the trappings of a very narrow religiosity to justify themselves. This is not spirituality in the sense of interconnectedness, love, integrity, search for meaning, and sense of the transcendent. In Christian scripture, Jesus said, "by their fruits, you shall know them.... A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit" (Mt. 7: 16-18). And St. Paul described the fruits of the spirit as "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Gal: 5: 22-23). Well, I have violated my own determinationto keep this short. We may produce an editor's

nightmare at this rate. Perhaps it is well that we have laid out our basic positions. From here perhaps we can limit ourselves to something more concise.

As you can see, concisenessis not one of my strengths. I do believe,however, taskis to sort this out, however our long it takes.The editor's taskis to cut and summarize. I look forward hearingfromyou. to Will

John
HiWilla:
I was interested in the way you were able to dissect a piece that was written as a whole. At this point, I am still a little confused. In your essay you say that spirituality should be an "issue for the public service." Later, in our dialogue, you say that we "do not need to encourage employees to incorporate their spirituality into their work." In the essay you assert that we do not often talk of spirituality. You also assert that the public service needs to be animated by spirituality."That sounds a lot like encouraging. I do not know how we can talk more about anything in a neutral or positive way without de facto encouraging it. I do not believe an issue like spirituality can be discussed and animate" the public service within the comfortable confines of your definitions. I believe it is a "loaded term" that will be defined by the user. Rather, I see animating the public service with spirituality as a slippery slope that will just as likely lead in negative as positive directions. I also have a problem with how this is really different from what goes on in many organizations every day. Especially if we define away any aspect of spirituality that conflicts with a benign application of individual values. There are more direct routes to the kind of participative processes you characterize. We can get there by discussing what works best, how we can meet the needs of various constituencies, win/win, alternative dispute resolution and other techniques that are likely to get to the same result without the definitional issues. I certainly agree that the spiritually motivated employees will bring their values to the work place. A wise employer, public or private will allow the free expression of those ideas. Those organizations will be more successful to the extent that they provide open environments for expression while they strive to accomplish their goals. That will happen without the perception that we need to animate the public service" with spirituality if the employer is simply committed to the free expression of ideas. Spiritually motivated ideas will get the same hearing that more "profane"concepts receive.

168

Public Administration * March/April Vol.59,No. 2 Review 1999,

If the aim of your essay was to encourage conversations about spirituality in the public service, you have succeeded. This is such a conversation. It is also the right forum. Not the workplace and especially not the public workplace. John

Will
Hi John, In responseto your comments,I'll say very little (rare for me). Yes, I did, indeed want to get conversation started about spirituality the publicserviceand that has now and begun to happen, thanks to your willingness to get involved. And, PARis the right forum for public dialog. I never did think that public employees,while at work, shouldsit about discussing spirituality. We'reoperatingon two differentlevelshere:one is the level of public dialog and debate,the other is the practical, everydayarena. I think we all need to be talking about spirituality and actingspiritually.I also think that most of us are responsibleemployeeswho have the wisdom to discernwhen and whereconversations place. take People are searchingand people want to supportand be supported. A 1997 survey reported in Se/f magazine, found that of the nearly2,100 respondents,70 percent describedthemselvesas "spiritual" another27 perand

cent said they were "somewhatspiritual." While that may mean that only spiritually inclinedpersonsrepliedto the survey,it's existenceand appearance indicatea growing opennessand awareness spiritualissues. I'm seeing of a hungerfor lived spirituality the workplace. in I'dlike to leaveour dialogwith the suggestionthatyou and any interestedreaderstake a look at Se/f magazine, December,1997, and some of the following books: JeffreySalkin, Taking to Work-, God John Hauhgey,Converting 9 to 5: A Spirituality Daily Work, of Alan Briskin,The Stirring Soulin The Workplace, of StevenCarter,Integrity, and, of course, George H. Frederickson, The Spirit of PublicAdministration. Thanksfor all your effort. Yourinsightsand questions haveassistedmy own thinking. Will Bruce

John
Hi Willa One thought. Beware survey results like those that you have quoted. A vast majority of our citizens describe themselves as "environmentalists" in survey after survey. Yet the same individuals rather routinely report that they will object to modifying their own behaviors that threaten the environment. They want to save the earth but not enough to car-pool. John

SpiritualityPublic in Service: Dialogue A

169