Abstract
Can the philosophical foundations of spiritual practices inform management education pedagogy and in the long-run support emotional development and more ethical and responsible business practice? In this article, we introduce the essential aspects of three different spiritual traditions—Daoist inner work, Buddhist mindful reflexivity, and Quaker discernment—and lay out some foundations between these essential aspects and management education pedagogy. We offer examples of utilizing these concepts in teaching business ethics in order to offer a foundational discussion for future elaboration. Our experiences also illuminate that instructor preparation is a key ingredient if the kinds of teaching we advance are to gain traction and contribute to the repeated calls for pedagogical innovations that challenge dominant paradigms. We offer some concluding remarks, pathways for future research and indicate a list of resources that can support potential instructors.
Highlights
We draw attention to showing how we encourage student vulnerability, which we address through our example of inner work from Dao practice; safe student self-disclosure, which we address through an example of mindful reflexivity from the Buddhist tradition; and, on developing trust, which we address through utilizing collective discernment from the Quaker tradition
We have connected the essential aspects of three different spiritual traditions to management education pedagogy, and Table 2 provides a summary
We have illuminated the possibilities for a management education pedagogy that encompasses the essential aspects of three spiritual practices
Summary
Management education critics (e.g., Ghoshal, 2005; Giacalone, 2004; Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Mitroff, 2004; Neal & Finlay, 2008; Waddock & Lozano, 2013) lament the absence of an ethical and spiritual foundation. Giacalone and Thompson (2006), for example, argued that management education is often framed by an excessive materialism and a logic of economics that leaves “ethics and social responsibility subordinate [emphasis in original]” (p. 274). Giacalone (2004) argued that the ‘scientific’ paradigm distorts student’s appreciation of nonfinancial goals such as love, forgiveness and integrity leading to ‘sadness’ and ‘nightmarish’ lives (pp. 416-418).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
