Therefore, the key question that the author seeks to answer is what religion offers to an organizational motivation, decision-making, and performance. Lawyer Stephen Carcer explains that the morality of a person depends on the person’s religious and spiritual tendencies. Contrary to his beliefs, Michael Lerner argues that spirituality is critical in self-realization and self-learning, that is necessary for the private and professional lives of individuals. These authors however, concur with the logic that institutionalization of spirituality is impossible without defying certain religious focus and locus. They insist that spirituality of an institution solely depends on the collective sacrifice.
Moreover, the most important information in this article is spirituality is not exclusively confined or tied to the individual’s religious faith. The Supreme Being, which is the idol in religion, is central in the understanding of spirituality, but spirituality in itself goes far beyond this Supreme Being. The author argues that spirituality is a journey, in which an individual examines his /her life, determines its purpose and meaning, establishes the absolute effect that his/ her life has on the environment, which includes the organization. Therefore, this information is fundamental in distinguishing spirituality as individualistic, whereas religion is institutionalized (Houston & Cartwright, 2007).
The key concepts that are required to understand this article are the forms of spiritual and religious expressions that re legally acceptable and politically permissible in the public workplace. The understanding of this article needs the articulate understanding of the rights of individuals as enshrined in the constitution, which outlines the privileges of the employer as well as those of the employee. This further requires the familiarity of the difference between the public and private sectors, with the additional scrutiny that