Editorial Introduction

In our first issue of Volume 13 of the Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, we are extremely pleased to bring you a special issue on Entrepreneurship and Spirituality. We have four excellent papers that add to our body of literature in Entrepreneurship and Spirituality.

In our editorial review, we will begin with a review of our four papers, followed by an overview written by Dr Kathryn Pavlovich in which she provides a framework to use some of the common themes in spirituality which could be extended into potential opportunities for new research in spiritual entrepreneurship. We hope this edition will provide researchers, in both entrepreneurship and spirituality, with new ideas for future research.

The first article, “Are you happy yet? Entrepreneurs’ subjective well-being” by Cynthia L. Sherman, Craig Randall, and Sandra K. Kauanui, explores entrepreneurs’ subjective well-being (commonly referred to as happiness) and the relationship to flow experiences, productivity, and an entrepreneur’s definition of success. The authors surveyed 191 entrepreneurs in which they found that entrepreneurs who work in productive organizations in which they find spiritual fulfilment through their work and experience flow also experience a greater sense of well-being. They also found that when controlling, for entrepreneurs based on their measure of success in terms of extrinsic/intrinsic factors, (such as money or social recognition) extrinsically oriented entrepreneurs had less well-being than intrinsically oriented entrepreneurs. The authors point out there is a strong relationship between flow, productivity, and workplace engagement that provides meaning and purpose in these entrepreneur’s life as well as subjective well-being. Sherman et al. suggest that the relationship to subjective well-being may help to explain why many entrepreneurs are able to weather the ups and downs of an entrepreneurial lifestyle. Their findings also seem to support the importance of entrepreneurs finding work that is meaningful and purposeful. The authors suggest these and other recent research points to the importance of exploring other factors beyond the financial health of the business when studying entrepreneurs.

The next article, “Spirituality and entrepreneurial failure” by Smita Singh, Patricia Doyle Corner, and Kathryn Pavlovich, explores a very different aspect of spirituality and entrepreneurship. The authors point out how spirituality can affect a very important part of the entrepreneurial process – failure. This is something entrepreneurs often face starting or building their business. Singh et al. were interested in understanding the part spirituality plays when entrepreneurs are dealing with venture failure and whether an entrepreneur’s spirituality makes a difference during or following a failure. The researchers implemented a qualitative, narrative study to learn more about the role of spirituality in entrepreneurs whose ventures failed. Nine entrepreneurs provided in-depth insight into how their spirituality affected their entrepreneurial experience of venture failure. The paper provides an excellent discussion of the various stages their entrepreneurs experienced throughout their venture failure. The first stage, or chapter as the authors refer to it, was when the entrepreneurs became “engaged deeply with failure.” Singh et al. provide clear examples of how these entrepreneurs looked well beyond the material and personal distress they were experiencing to understand the failure in light of the meaning it provided for them, as well as how they would make it through. In the second stage, or chapter, the entrepreneurs spoke of a deepening spirituality through failure. They become more “self-aware” which allowed them to become more aware of the “self” as they became deeply engaged in the failure of their business. They learned a great deal about themselves (personal growth) which provided them with valuable lessons they could bring to future ventures or for some, a better understanding as to whether entrepreneurship was a path they should take in the future.

The third article, “Spiritual institutional entrepreneurs (SIEs): an introduction and examination” by Tracy H. Porter and Mathew C. Mitchell, adds to the current literature in institutional entrepreneurship (IE) by exploring the rise in institutional entrepreneurs who are supporting the change in organizations as spiritual workplaces. Institutional entrepreneurs are the “activities of actors who have an interest in a particular institutional arrangement and who leverage resources to create new institutions or transform existing ones” (Maguire et al. 2004, p. 657). According to the authors, institutional entrepreneurs are individuals who believe in a new innovative idea that will enhance an organization to find a way to initiate or transform their organization. The authors have proposed a conceptual model for SIEs in which individuals have led their organizations to reshape and redefine themselves using the lens of workplace spirituality. Porter and Mitchell further explain that these individuals create workplaces in which work has been seen as a calling and is aligned to their employees’ personal values. In their model, the authors suggest that SIEs utilize the workplace spirituality framework to create an environment that provides meaningful work and a strong community. They also point out the importance of alignment between the individuals in the organization and the organization’s values. They provide four organizations as exemplars in which the SIE has successfully facilitated Workplace Spirituality in their organization. To conclude, Tracy and Mathew offer a number of recommendations for future research for those who are interested in SIEs.

The fourth, and last article in the issue, “Self-leadership, spirituality, and entrepreneur performance: a conceptual model” by Jeffrey L. Godwin, Christopher P. Neck, and Robert S. D’Intino, is an interesting investigation into the value of how self-leadership and spirituality can be utilized to handle the demands, as well as the stressors, of being an entrepreneur. The authors point out that through the process of starting a business, an individual needs to use all of their personal resources to support the start-up and growth of their business. It often requires entrepreneurs to make many difficult decisions under conditions of uncertainty which goes with a new venture. The researchers suggest that spirituality positively impacts an individual’s cognition, along with the process of self-leadership. Therefore, they posit the combination of spirituality and self-leadership leads to a more aware and resilient cognition. As such, Godwin et al. suggest entrepreneurs who are able to reframe their perspective to a more positive self-talk and mental imagery (self-leadership) based on a spiritual perspective will reduce stress and help to prevent irrational thinking which leads to poor decision-making. In addition, the authors propose that if an entrepreneur’s values and beliefs come from one’s spiritual base, an entrepreneur can use self-leadership to help strengthen their motivation during difficult times. They propose that it could help to engage entrepreneurs into “opportunity thinking” for their business rather than “obstacle thinking” (Neck and Manz 1992).

Entrepreneurship and Spirituality are becoming more relevant in the past decade. However, there is still a great deal more research that can be done. For those interested in spiritual entrepreneurship, we are offering some future directions in the next section.

Future research (authored by Kathryn Pavlovich)

Future directions for research in spiritual entrepreneurship could extend the commonly cited themes that characterize spirituality: transcendence (meta levels of analysis), connectedness (macro levels of analysis), and inner work (micro levels of analysis) as illustrated in Figure 1. There is a research gap regarding how these themes specifically relate to spiritual entrepreneurs. Are these themes the same for spiritual entrepreneurs, and if so, do they relate in the same way? Because the road to venture creation is uncertain and resource constrained, does how entrepreneurs enact and effectuate (Sarasvathy 2008) offer specific insights into the above characteristics?

Figure 1. Future research opportunities.

The first theme of transcendence means to rise above self-interest and work for the collective good of the society. Lui and Robertson (2011, p. 37) explain that such a state “elevates the self defined in the secular level to a sacred level in which the self is constructed within a broader ontological context and a higher realm of consciousness beyond the ego.” In this special issue, Singh et al. (2016) demonstrate how the entrepreneur’s spirituality enabled them to transcend above their own sense of failure as they felt connected to something greater than themselves. The concept of transcendence could be examined as entrepreneurs create a new world. Such questions could examine how spiritual entrepreneurs may be different from the growing number of social entrepreneurs and eco-entrepreneurs. Further, what could the relationship between the spiritual entrepreneur and transcendence look like as a meta-level collective shift in society?

The second theme that characterizes spirituality is a sense of connectedness. Karakas et al. (2015, p. 816) define connectedness as a “collective thriving and flourishing through high-quality interpersonal relationships and encompasses an organizational climate characterized by trust, friendship, genuineness, belonging, and interpersonal sensitivity”. For some scholars, connectedness means a deep relationship to each other and also to all of nature (Chu 2007, Mitroff 2003). This places the quality of how we connect with each other at the core of organizing through working towards a common grace. Currently, there is a rise in interest in virtuous action that underpin relational approaches, such as compassion, humility, and gratitude (Delbecq 2006, Dutton et al. 2014). This has particular significance for entrepreneurs, as they are resource poor and need to develop strong relational networks to enact venture creation. Pavlovich and Corner (2009, p. 223) examined an entrepreneurial organic skincare enterprise that enacted an eco-systems approach to engage with connectedness. The following quote highlights the quality of connectedness that permeates throughout their whole production cycle. They stated, “We are only borrowing the ingredients. We put these ingredients on our faces and 90% of the product gets washed off and goes straight back into the environment. Now, what do we want? Do we want plant extracts going into our waterways, or do we want mineral oils and synthetic (and sometimes toxic) chemicals? They are not good for the fish life and the mineral oils just sit there. Our intention is that our products are ethically sourced and produced, and have minimal impact after they have been consumed” (p. 223). This illustrates a spiritual view of connectedness, that there is a common grace being worked towards. This theme is also evident in this special issue in Porter and Mitchell’s (2016) examination of IE in creating organizational change towards spiritual workplaces. Further research could examine the quality of this connectedness and what it means in creating a system shift.

The third and final theme relates to the inner work that the spiritual entrepreneur engages with. Mindfulness and reflexivity are areas of significant research, yet to date there has been limited application to both spirituality research and spiritual entrepreneurship. Research developments in neuroscience demonstrate that contemplative practices increase activity in the right ventro-lateral prefrontal cortex, which dampens the amygdala response (where anger is processed) while also increasing the structural thickness in the middle prefrontal and right insular areas for increased brain plasticity (Hölzel et al. 2011, Lazar et al. 2005). However, little is known about the extent to which these spiritual practices transform human potential. In this special issue, Godwin et al. (2016) offer insights into the link between self-leadership and spirituality. A second area for future research relates to meaning and purpose. This links with the current debate in the entrepreneurship literature regarding how opportunities are found. Are they discovered or are they created (Alvarez et al. 2013). What role does intuition play in the sourcing of opportunities? Where does this intuition come from? Do these entrepreneurs view their intuition as coming from the subconscious mind or from a higher source of consciousness? Can they describe their relationship to such a source? Sherman et al. (2016, p. 19) found support for the inner search for meaning through “stretching entrepreneurs’ skills and abilities through flow experiences [that may] enhance their resilience and tenacity”. Linking these issues to the current debate in entrepreneurship would add new contributions into the entrepreneurship field.

Research within these themes have the potential to contribute to the spiritual entrepreneurship field. Following the critique of Driscoll and Wiebe (2007), we must ensure that our research focuses on spirituality as the central organizing principle, not just as a context to apply known techniques.

Special Note

This special issue has been two years in the making. Kathryn Pavlovich and I have put in many hours working on this project. We hope you enjoy this special issues as much as we enjoyed conceiving it and providing it to you.

As always we are interested in finding reviewers who would like to serve on our editorial board. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer, please contact Sandra Kauanui, Editor-in-Chief.
Editor-in-Chief  Sandra K. Kauanui
Associate Editor  Kathryn Pavlovich
Associate Editor   Laszlo Zsolnai
Associate Editor  James King, Jr.
Book Review Editor  Ora Setter
Invited Features Editors  Charles Manz and Karen Manz
Administrator   Thomas Weintraub