Discussion: View Thread

Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

  • 1.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-11-2007 13:19
    Dear colleagues,
     
    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management.  I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.

     

    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     

     

    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."

     

    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."

     

    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?

     

    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?

     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.  
    With respect and good wishes,
    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu


  • 2.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-11-2007 20:25
    Thanks Mathew,
     
    I'm not yet a member of MSR, but was really excited when I came across the group recently - basically because it seemed to represent a broad view of spirituality and its role in management, and this is something that I believe has stunning potential and applicability in improving the fulfilment of people and organisations. While much of spiritual practice does not lend itself to rational understanding, I think the results that emerge through bringing spirituality and management together are measurable, explainable and can be meaningfully and valuably scrutinised from a rational, and possibly scientific perspective. I think it is important that this is done, and that the grounded value of this approach is researched and articulated and disseminated, and I hope that this is the purpose of MSR. From your message, I gather that this is also your hope or understanding.
     
    I haven't read the newsletter in question (not being a member), but from what you say I suspect I would share your concerns, and it would suggest to me that this is not the group that I was looking for. I suspect that I would have found the article you mention interesting, but it seems like not the sort of thing I would be looking for in this context.
     
    I hope you get a satisfactory reply to your query.
     
    Regards,
     
    Brendan Coutts
     
     
     
    ----- Original Message -----
    Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:18 AM
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Dear colleagues,
     
    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management.  I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.

     

    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     

     

    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."

     

    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."

     

    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?

     

    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?

     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.  
    With respect and good wishes,
    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu


  • 3.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-13-2007 06:24

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  

     

    A humble opinion,

    Stacie

     

     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

     

    Dear colleagues,

     

    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename></st1:place>.  I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.

     

    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).    

     

    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."

     

    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."

     

    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?

     

    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?

     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.  

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew


    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business</st1:placename></st1:place>
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">State</st1:placetype> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
    Campus <st1:address w:st="on"><st1:street w:st="on">Box</st1:street> 5580</st1:address>
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">State</st1:placetype> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Normal</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">IL</st1:state> <st1:postalcode w:st="on">61790-5580</st1:postalcode></st1:place>
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu



  • 4.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-16-2007 10:39

    Would someone resend that newsletter to me or tell me where to find it?  

    I'm still picking my jaw up off the floor without having seen the original article.

    Thanks

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Linda</st1:givenname>

     

     


    From: <st1:givenname w:st="on">Management</st1:givenname>, <st1:givenname w:st="on">Spirituality</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">&</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Religion</st1:sn> [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Stacie</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Chappell</st1:sn></st2:personname>
    Sent: Friday, <st2:date year="2007" day="13" month="4" ls="trans" w:st="on">April 13, 2007</st2:date> <st2:time minute="24" hour="5" w:st="on">5:24 AM</st2:time>
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

     

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Matthew</st1:givenname> – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, <st2:stockticker w:st="on">AND</st2:stockticker> part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  

     

    A humble opinion,

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Stacie</st1:givenname>

     

     


    From: <st1:givenname w:st="on">Management</st1:givenname>, <st1:givenname w:st="on">Spirituality</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">&</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Religion</st1:sn> [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Sheep</st1:sn></st2:personname>
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 <st2:time minute="19" hour="1" w:st="on">1:19 AM</st2:time>
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

     

    Dear colleagues,

     

    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st2:placetype> of <st2:placename w:st="on">Management</st2:placename></st2:place>.  I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   <st1:givenname w:st="on">Bob</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Giacalone</st1:sn>'s and <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Carole</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Jurkiewicz</st1:sn></st2:personname>'s opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.

     

    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Ramnath</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Narayanswamy</st1:sn></st2:personname>.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).    

     

    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn>."  The article states, "She is the living <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn>, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."

     

    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."

     

    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?

     

    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as <st1:givenname w:st="on">Jesus</st1:givenname>, the Pope, <st1:sn w:st="on">Muhammad</st1:sn>, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn> compatible with each other?

     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.  

    With respect and good wishes,

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname>


    --
    <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">L.</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Sheep</st1:sn>, <st1:namesuffix w:st="on">Ph.D.</st1:namesuffix></st2:personname>
    Assistant Professor of Management
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placetype w:st="on">College</st2:placetype> of <st2:placename w:st="on">Business</st2:placename></st2:place>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st2:placename> <st2:placetype w:st="on">State</st2:placetype> <st2:placetype w:st="on">University</st2:placetype></st2:place>
    Campus <st2:address w:st="on"><st2:street w:st="on">Box</st2:street> 5580</st2:address>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st2:placename> <st2:placetype w:st="on">State</st2:placetype> <st2:placetype w:st="on">University</st2:placetype></st2:place>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:city w:st="on">Normal</st2:city>, <st2:state w:st="on">IL</st2:state> <st2:postalcode w:st="on">61790-5580</st2:postalcode></st2:place>
    Phone. <st2:phone phonenumber="$6438$$$" o:ls="trans" w:st="on">(309) <st2:phone phonenumber="$6438$$$" o:ls="trans" w:st="on">438-3468</st2:phone></st2:phone>
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu



  • 5.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-16-2007 13:39
    Hi all,
    It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication of the article but the context.  If we framed it as an interesting variant of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of such new variants - rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter - I think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    Lee Robbins

    Dr. Lee Robbins
    Professor of Management
    Golden Gate University School of Business
    536 Mission St.
    San Francisco, CA. 94105

    cell: 415-713-1341
    415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    work FAX: 415-442-6579
    <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu>
    <LRobbins@ggu.edu>


    From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    Reply-To: <stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    To: <MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  
     
    A humble opinion,
    Stacie
     
     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    Dear colleagues,



    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.
     
    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     
     
    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."
     
    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."
     
    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?
     
    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?
     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.   

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu



  • 6.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-16-2007 14:47
    Linda,

    This link should take you right to the newsletter (you may have to log into the academy of management website first, not sure).

    http://group.aomonline.org/msr/AOM_MSR_newsletter_winter_2007.pdf

    David Longstreet
    Avila University - Kansas City Missouri

    On Apr 16, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Linda C. Rodríguez wrote:

    Would someone resend that newsletter to me or tell me where to find it?  

    I'm still picking my jaw up off the floor without having seen the original article.

    Thanks

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Linda</st1:givenname>

     

     


    From: <st1:givenname w:st="on">Management</st1:givenname>, <st1:givenname w:st="on">Spirituality</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">&</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Religion</st1:sn> [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Stacie</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Chappell</st1:sn></st2:personname>
    Sent: Friday, <st2:date year="2007" day="13" month="4" ls="trans" w:st="on">April 13, 2007</st2:date> <st2:time minute="24" hour="5" w:st="on">5:24 AM</st2:time>
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

     

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Matthew</st1:givenname> – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, <st2:stockticker w:st="on">AND</st2:stockticker> part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  

     

    A humble opinion,

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Stacie</st1:givenname>

     

     


    From: <st1:givenname w:st="on">Management</st1:givenname>, <st1:givenname w:st="on">Spirituality</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">&</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Religion</st1:sn> [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Sheep</st1:sn></st2:personname>
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 <st2:time minute="19" hour="1" w:st="on">1:19 AM</st2:time>
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

     

    Dear colleagues,

     

    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st2:placetype> of <st2:placename w:st="on">Management</st2:placename></st2:place>.  I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   <st1:givenname w:st="on">Bob</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Giacalone</st1:sn>'s and <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Carole</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Jurkiewicz</st1:sn></st2:personname>'s opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.

     

    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by<st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Ramnath</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Narayanswamy</st1:sn></st2:personname>.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).    

     

    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn>."  The article states, "She is the living <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn>, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."

     

    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."

     

    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?

     

    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as <st1:givenname w:st="on">Jesus</st1:givenname>, the Pope, <st1:sn w:st="on">Muhammad</st1:sn>, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" <st1:sn w:st="on">Christ</st1:sn> compatible with each other?

     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.  

    With respect and good wishes,

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname>


    --
    <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Mathew</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">L.</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Sheep</st1:sn>, <st1:namesuffix w:st="on">Ph.D.</st1:namesuffix></st2:personname>
    Assistant Professor of Management
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placetype w:st="on">College</st2:placetype> of <st2:placename w:st="on">Business</st2:placename></st2:place>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st2:placename> <st2:placetype w:st="on">State</st2:placetype> <st2:placetype w:st="on">University</st2:placetype></st2:place>
    Campus <st2:address w:st="on"><st2:street w:st="on">Box</st2:street> 5580</st2:address>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placename w:st="on">Illinois</st2:placename> <st2:placetype w:st="on">State</st2:placetype> <st2:placetype w:st="on">University</st2:placetype></st2:place>
    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:city w:st="on">Normal</st2:city>, <st2:state w:st="on">IL</st2:state> <st2:postalcode w:st="on">61790-5580</st2:postalcode></st2:place>
    Phone. <st2:phone phonenumber="$6438$$$" o:ls="trans" w:st="on">(309) <st2:phone phonenumber="$6438$$$" o:ls="trans" w:st="on">438-3468</st2:phone></st2:phone>
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu





  • 7.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-16-2007 18:56
    Lee,
    I certainly concur.  No one should fear the free expression of religious sentiments/beliefs if presented as personal opinion/dialogue and not as a de-contextualized assertion of "truth" claims.  As I tried to emphasize in my first e-mail, it is the lack of editorial framing and context that is disturbing (and I mean that very generally, not as a personal disparagement to anyone).  In a setting of spiritual/religious pluralism with all of the sensitivities that is bound to imply, it seems to me that everyone should feel welcome to bring something to the table.  However, the overall context should be carefully and watchfully preserved as being neutral territory, free of singular or ulterior religious agendas, and thoroughly open to critical review and scientific rigor (as much as we can possibly make it).  Preliminary remarks and transparent framing of the purposes behind presenting such material to such an audience is key. 
    Best regards,
    Mathew
     
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu

     
    On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,
    It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication of the article but the context.  If we framed it as an interesting variant of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of such new variants - rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter - I think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    Lee Robbins

    Dr. Lee Robbins
    Professor of Management
    Golden Gate University School of Business
    536 Mission St.
    San Francisco, CA. 94105

    cell: 415-713-1341
    415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    work FAX: 415-442-6579
    <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    <LRobbins@ggu.edu>


    From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  
     
    A humble opinion,
    Stacie
     
     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    Dear colleagues,



    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.
     
    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     
     
    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."
     
    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."
     
    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?
     
    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?
     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.   

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu




    --


  • 8.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-16-2007 19:16
    Lee,
    I also wanted to add to my previous e-mail that I appreciate so much what you have said in yours.  Thanks.
    Mathew

     
    On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,
    It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication of the article but the context.  If we framed it as an interesting variant of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of such new variants - rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter - I think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    Lee Robbins

    Dr. Lee Robbins
    Professor of Management
    Golden Gate University School of Business
    536 Mission St.
    San Francisco, CA. 94105

    cell: 415-713-1341
    415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    work FAX: 415-442-6579
    <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    <LRobbins@ggu.edu>


    From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  
     
    A humble opinion,
    Stacie
     
     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    Dear colleagues,



    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.
     
    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     
     
    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."
     
    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."
     
    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?
     
    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?
     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.   

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu




    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu


  • 9.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-17-2007 11:53
    Are we having this discussion because our vision/mission is vague, misunderstood, or was the manuscript inconsistent with our charge?
    -----Original Message-----

    From: "Mathew Sheep" <msheep@ILSTU.EDU>
    Subj: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:11 am
    Size: 5K
    To: "MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU" <MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>

    Lee,
    I also wanted to add to my previous e-mail that I appreciate so much what
    you have said in yours. Thanks.
    Mathew


    On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    >
    > Hi all,
    > It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication
    > of the article but the context. If we framed it as an interesting variant
    > of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then
    > asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of
    > such new variants — rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter — I
    > think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    > Lee Robbins
    >
    > Dr. Lee Robbins
    > Professor of Management
    > Golden Gate University School of Business
    > 536 Mission St.
    > San Francisco, CA. 94105
    >
    > *cell: 415-713-1341
    > *415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    > work FAX: 415-442-6579
    > <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu>
    > <LRobbins@ggu.edu>
    >
    > ------------------------------
    > *From: *Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    > *Reply-To: *<stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    > *Date: *Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    > *To: *<MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    > *Subject: *Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    > Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an
    > opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest
    > in the newsletter. I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND
    > part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution –
    > worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style
    > or appropriate for a journal. The article claims to introduce the reader to
    > an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and
    > personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are
    > also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful
    > role in spiritual practice around the world. I was introduced to her
    > traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting
    > person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely
    > worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more
    > research.
    >
    > A humble opinion,
    > Stacie
    >
    >
    >
    > ------------------------------
    >
    > *From:* Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]<MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]>
    > *On Behalf Of *Mathew Sheep
    > *Sent:* Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    > *To:* MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > *Subject:* Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Dear colleagues,
    >
    >
    >
    > Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of
    > Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of
    > Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific
    > study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management
    > discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.). Bob Giacalone's and
    > Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led
    > me to believe that.
    >
    > With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and
    > declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter,
    > 2007): "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.
    > I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe,
    > and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.
    > If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all
    > individuals, then we must respect all faiths—including non-faith—not
    > prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular
    > human being).
    >
    > The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging
    > diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity
    > under the "Divine Mother" known as "Amma"—a person who is unequivocally
    > alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ." The article
    > states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the
    > living personification of love in action.…the devotee is reminded of the
    > Divine Mother's omniscience."
    >
    > Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she
    > were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously
    > asserts: "The Master is none other than God in human form."
    >
    > In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things
    > spiritual and religious: "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana
    > (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga
    > (contemplative union with the Supreme)." So, are we to believe that all of
    > the major world religions—Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism,
    > etc.—are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one
    > umbrella—in a singular human, Amma?
    >
    > Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else
    > that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an
    > academic newsletter? Coul


  • 10.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-17-2007 14:10
    I have followed this discussion with interest.  I teach management as well as business ethics and social responsibility.  One issue that I do not think has surfaced that I am concerned about concerns how to provide feedback or raise questions about things you are dissatisfied with.   Praise publically, provide negative or constructive feedback privately is one of the rules of effective feedback and also denotes respect for the persons involved.   What should have been the first step in this inquiry?  Personally, I would have recommended communication with the editors of our Newsletter to inquire about the process they used to decide to include the article about Anna.   Perhaps communication with the author of the article himself to inquire about what his intended purpose was when he wrote his piece and why he thought the MSR newsletter was an appropriate formum for its publication would have also been a good idea.  This correspondence would have very likely generated important information about the issues Prof. Sheep presented in his posting that might have resolved the issues outright or allowed us all to productively discuss his concerns when he presented them.
     
    As a first step, however, I question whether a posting to a public forum such as the MSR list was the right move.   It seems that that initial posting was based on more that one assumption (i.e. that there was some unstated intent to publishing the article or that the editors explicitly thought about how the article fit with the mission of the group) that require inspection and validation.  
     
    ANYWAY, as we move forward with the discussion that the posting has generated, I would ask that we keep in mind how the nature of our postings and their tone reflect on MSR as a community. 
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:56 PM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Lee,
    I certainly concur.  No one should fear the free expression of religious sentiments/beliefs if presented as personal opinion/dialogue and not as a de-contextualized assertion of "truth" claims.  As I tried to emphasize in my first e-mail, it is the lack of editorial framing and context that is disturbing (and I mean that very generally, not as a personal disparagement to anyone).  In a setting of spiritual/religious pluralism with all of the sensitivities that is bound to imply, it seems to me that everyone should feel welcome to bring something to the table.  However, the overall context should be carefully and watchfully preserved as being neutral territory, free of singular or ulterior religious agendas, and thoroughly open to critical review and scientific rigor (as much as we can possibly make it).  Preliminary remarks and transparent framing of the purposes behind presenting such material to such an audience is key. 
    Best regards,
    Mathew
     
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu

     
    On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,
    It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication of the article but the context.  If we framed it as an interesting variant of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of such new variants - rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter - I think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    Lee Robbins

    Dr. Lee Robbins
    Professor of Management
    Golden Gate University School of Business
    536 Mission St.
    San Francisco, CA. 94105

    cell: 415-713-1341
    415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    work FAX: 415-442-6579
    <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    <LRobbins@ggu.edu>


    From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  
     
    A humble opinion,
    Stacie
     
     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    Dear colleagues,



    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.
     
    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     
     
    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."
     
    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."
     
    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?
     
    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?
     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.   

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu




    --


  • 11.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-17-2007 15:24
    Hi, all.
    I think these kinds of issues DO need to be discussed as a group. In my time following MSR, there have been a few discussions of "who we are." As I take it, this was the intent of Matthew's posting...and very appropriate for the listserv as it is something that all of us should be a part of...regardless of the intent of the author of that particular article. 
     
    Kathy Wiegand
     
    Katherine E. Wiegand, Ph.D.
    Department of Psychology
    Georgia Southern University
    P.O. Box 8041
    Statesboro, GA 30460
    phone: (912) 486-7282
    fax: (912) 681-0751

    >>> John Bunch <jbunch@BENEDICTINE.EDU> 4/17/2007 2:09 PM >>>
    I have followed this discussion with interest.  I teach management as well as business ethics and social responsibility.  One issue that I do not think has surfaced that I am concerned about concerns how to provide feedback or raise questions about things you are dissatisfied with.   Praise publically, provide negative or constructive feedback privately is one of the rules of effective feedback and also denotes respect for the persons involved.   What should have been the first step in this inquiry?  Personally, I would have recommended communication with the editors of our Newsletter to inquire about the process they used to decide to include the article about Anna.   Perhaps communication with the author of the article himself to inquire about what his intended purpose was when he wrote his piece and why he thought the MSR newsletter was an appropriate formum for its publication would have also been a good idea.  This correspondence would have very likely generated important information about the issues Prof. Sheep presented in his posting that might have resolved the issues outright or allowed us all to productively discuss his concerns when he presented them.
     
    As a first step, however, I question whether a posting to a public forum such as the MSR list was the right move.   It seems that that initial posting was based on more that one assumption (i.e. that there was some unstated intent to publishing the article or that the editors explicitly thought about how the article fit with the mission of the group) that require inspection and validation.  
     
    ANYWAY, as we move forward with the discussion that the posting has generated, I would ask that we keep in mind how the nature of our postings and their tone reflect on MSR as a community. 
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:56 PM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Lee,
    I certainly concur.  No one should fear the free expression of religious sentiments/beliefs if presented as personal opinion/dialogue and not as a de-contextualized assertion of "truth" claims.  As I tried to emphasize in my first e-mail, it is the lack of editorial framing and context that is disturbing (and I mean that very generally, not as a personal disparagement to anyone).  In a setting of spiritual/religious pluralism with all of the sensitivities that is bound to imply, it seems to me that everyone should feel welcome to bring something to the table.  However, the overall context should be carefully and watchfully preserved as being neutral territory, free of singular or ulterior religious agendas, and thoroughly open to critical review and scientific rigor (as much as we can possibly make it).  Preliminary remarks and transparent framing of the purposes behind presenting such material to such an audience is key. 
    Best regards,
    Mathew
     
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu

     
    On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,
    It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication of the article but the context.  If we framed it as an interesting variant of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of such new variants - rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter - I think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    Lee Robbins

    Dr. Lee Robbins
    Professor of Management
    Golden Gate University School of Business
    536 Mission St.
    San Francisco, CA. 94105

    cell: 415-713-1341
    415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    work FAX: 415-442-6579
    <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    <LRobbins@ggu.edu>


    From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of interest in the newsletter.  I understand and generally agree with your reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an academic style or appropriate for a journal.  The article claims to introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world.  I was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon perhaps even worthy of more research.  
     
    A humble opinion,
    Stacie
     
     


    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    Dear colleagues,



    Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.).   Bob Giacalone's and Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led me to believe that.
     
    With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter, 2007):   "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.  I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe, and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.   If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all individuals, then we must respect all faiths-including non-faith-not prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular human being).     
     
    The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity under the "Divine Mother" known as   "Amma"-a person who is unequivocally alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ."  The article states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the living personification of love in action....the devotee is reminded of the Divine Mother's omniscience."
     
    Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously asserts:   "The Master is none other than God in human form."
     
    In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all things spiritual and religious:  "Amma is a stunning personification of jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)."   So, are we to believe that all of the major world religions-Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.-are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under one umbrella-in a singular human, Amma?
     
    Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an academic newsletter?   Could I make equal claims for any other singular human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter?   Are scientific endeavors and claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with each other?
     

    I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an article belongs in an academic outlet-unqualified, no disclaimers, no editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the article.   I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management, Spirituality, and Religion.   It unabashedly advances a particular faith in the Divine claims of a singular human individual.  I feel as though I am reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social scientific newsletter.   

    With respect and good wishes,

    Mathew

    --
    Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Management
    College of Business
    Illinois State University
    Campus Box 5580
    Illinois State University
    Normal, IL 61790-5580
    Phone. (309) 438-3468
    E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu




    --


  • 12.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-17-2007 17:31

    Mathew Sheep's concerns are important on a couple of levels: Was the article appropriate for the newsletter, and more fundamentally, what is the purpose of the MSR group?

     

    For those who have not had an opportunity to read it, here is a passage that conveys the flavour of the article: "Mata Amritanandamayi, or the Divine Mother as she is popularly known, is the biggest and most unique blessing that has been conferred upon humankind in recent history.... [later in the article] Amma is a living master. The mere presence of such a Mahatma is beneficial to the universe."

     

    Because my own research has been in both organization theory and the sociology of religion, I was excited when MSR was created. I envisioned it as a group dedicated to the study of organizational phenomena where religion is a variable.

     

    However, as the group has evolved, it seems to be more of a group for *doing* religion than for *studying* religion. In other words, members' religious beliefs have become more central to the functioning of MSR than I had ever expected. The article in question is appropriate if MSR is a forum for worship, but utterly inappropriate if this is a forum for research.

     

    Marc Mentzer

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Commerce</st1:placename></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Saskatchewan</st1:placename></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Saskatoon</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">Saskatchewan</st1:state>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Canada</st1:country-region></st1:place>

     

     



  • 13.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-17-2007 18:01
    Marc Mentzer's comments remind me of an issue I raised some months ago:  Unless we can agree on what spirituality is and how to measure it, our ability to study it seems quite limited.  Of course, this first step is a big one! 
     
    Tom Slocombe
    Emporia State University
    Emporia, Kansas
     


    >>> "Mentzer, Marc" <mentzer@COMMERCE.USASK.CA> 4/17/2007 4:30 PM >>>

    Mathew Sheep's concerns are important on a couple of levels: Was the article appropriate for the newsletter, and more fundamentally, what is the purpose of the MSR group?

     

    For those who have not had an opportunity to read it, here is a passage that conveys the flavour of the article: "Mata Amritanandamayi, or the Divine Mother as she is popularly known, is the biggest and most unique blessing that has been conferred upon humankind in recent history.. [later in the article] Amma is a living master. The mere presence of such a Mahatma is beneficial to the universe."

     

    Because my own research has been in both organization theory and the sociology of religion, I was excited when MSR was created. I envisioned it as a group dedicated to the study of organizational phenomena where religion is a variable.

     

    However, as the group has evolved, it seems to be more of a group for *doing* religion than for *studying* religion. In other words, members' religious beliefs have become more central to the functioning of MSR than I had ever expected. The article in question is appropriate if MSR is a forum for worship, but utterly inappropriate if this is a forum for research.

     

    Marc Mentzer

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Commerce</st1:placename></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Saskatchewan</st1:placename></st1:place>

    <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Saskatoon</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">Saskatchewan</st1:state>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Canada</st1:country-region></st1:place>

     

     



  • 14.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-18-2007 03:28
    The thing is, the original article was published in a public forum, so with
    respect John, I think it not only appropriate, but very healthy that the
    response was too. I have found the ensuing discussion very interesting.

    Bill Cooke

    Quoting John Bunch <jbunch@BENEDICTINE.EDU>:

    > I have followed this discussion with interest. I teach management as well
    > as business ethics and social responsibility. One issue that I do not think
    > has surfaced that I am concerned about concerns how to provide feedback or
    > raise questions about things you are dissatisfied with. Praise publically,
    > provide negative or constructive feedback privately is one of the rules of
    > effective feedback and also denotes respect for the persons involved. What
    > should have been the first step in this inquiry? Personally, I would have
    > recommended communication with the editors of our Newsletter to inquire
    > about the process they used to decide to include the article about Anna.
    > Perhaps communication with the author of the article himself to inquire
    > about what his intended purpose was when he wrote his piece and why he
    > thought the MSR newsletter was an appropriate formum for its publication
    > would have also been a good idea. This correspondence would have very
    > likely generated important information about the issues Prof. Sheep
    > presented in his posting that might have resolved the issues outright or
    > allowed us all to productively discuss his concerns when he presented them.
    >
    > As a first step, however, I question whether a posting to a public forum
    > such as the MSR list was the right move. It seems that that initial
    > posting was based on more that one assumption (i.e. that there was some
    > unstated intent to publishing the article or that the editors explicitly
    > thought about how the article fit with the mission of the group) that
    > require inspection and validation.
    >
    > ANYWAY, as we move forward with the discussion that the posting has
    > generated, I would ask that we keep in mind how the nature of our postings
    > and their tone reflect on MSR as a community.
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]On
    > Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:56 PM
    > To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Lee,
    > I certainly concur. No one should fear the free expression of religious
    > sentiments/beliefs if presented as personal opinion/dialogue and not as a
    > de-contextualized assertion of "truth" claims. As I tried to emphasize in
    > my first e-mail, it is the lack of editorial framing and context that is
    > disturbing (and I mean that very generally, not as a personal disparagement
    > to anyone). In a setting of spiritual/religious pluralism with all of the
    > sensitivities that is bound to imply, it seems to me that everyone should
    > feel welcome to bring something to the table. However, the overall context
    > should be carefully and watchfully preserved as being neutral territory,
    > free of singular or ulterior religious agendas, and thoroughly open to
    > critical review and scientific rigor (as much as we can possibly make it).
    > Preliminary remarks and transparent framing of the purposes behind
    > presenting such material to such an audience is key.
    > Best regards,
    > Mathew
    >
    > Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    > Assistant Professor of Management
    > College of Business
    > Illinois State University
    > Campus Box 5580
    > Illinois State University
    > Normal, IL 61790-5580
    > Phone. (309) 438-3468
    > E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu
    >
    >
    > On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication
    > of the article but the context. If we framed it as an interesting variant
    > of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then
    > asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of
    > such new variants — rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter — I
    > think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    > Lee Robbins
    >
    > Dr. Lee Robbins
    > Professor of Management
    > Golden Gate University School of Business
    > 536 Mission St.
    > San Francisco, CA. 94105
    >
    > cell: 415-713-1341
    > 415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    > work FAX: 415-442-6579
    > <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    > <LRobbins@ggu.edu>
    >
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    > Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    > Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    > To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    > Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like
    > an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of
    > interest in the newsletter. I understand and generally agree with your
    > reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting
    > contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an
    > academic style or appropriate for a journal. The article claims to
    > introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does
    > that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of
    > unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article
    > aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world. I
    > was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She
    > is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of
    > questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon
    > perhaps even worthy of more research.
    >
    > A humble opinion,
    > Stacie
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]
    > On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    > Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    > To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Dear colleagues,
    >
    >
    >
    > Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of
    > Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of
    > Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific
    > study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management
    > discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.). Bob Giacalone's and
    > Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led
    > me to believe that.
    >
    > With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and
    > declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter,
    > 2007): "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.
    > I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe,
    > and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.
    > If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all
    > individuals, then we must respect all faiths—including non-faith—not
    > prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular
    > human being).
    >
    > The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging
    > diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity
    > under the "Divine Mother" known as "Amma"—a person who is unequivocally
    > alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ." The article
    > states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the
    > living personification of love in action.…the devotee is reminded of the
    > Divine Mother's omniscience."
    >
    > Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if
    > she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously
    > asserts: "The Master is none other than God in human form."
    >
    > In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all
    > things spiritual and religious: "Amma is a stunning personification of
    > jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja
    > yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)." So, are we to believe that
    > all of the major world religions—Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism,
    > Hinduism, etc.—are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under
    > one umbrella—in a singular human, Amma?
    >
    > Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else
    > that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an
    > academic newsletter? Could I make equal claims for any other singular
    > human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it
    > published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter? Are scientific endeavors and
    > claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with
    > each other?
    >
    >
    > I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an
    > article belongs in an academic outlet—unqualified, no disclaimers, no
    > editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the
    > article. I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science
    > alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management,
    > Spirituality, and Religion. It unabashedly advances a particular faith in
    > the Divine claims of a singular human individual. I feel as though I am
    > reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social
    > scientific newsletter.
    >
    > With respect and good wishes,
    >
    > Mathew
    >
    > --
    > Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    > Assistant Professor of Management
    > College of Business
    > Illinois State University
    > Campus Box 5580
    > Illinois State University
    > Normal, IL 61790-5580
    > Phone. (309) 438-3468
    > E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    >



    Bill Cooke
    Senior Lecturer in Organizational Analysis
    Manchester Business School (E29)
    University of Manchester
    Manchester M15 9GH
    44 (161) 306 3411


  • 15.  Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter

    Posted 04-18-2007 12:59
    I don't disagree with that. My point was that if Sheep had gotten an explanation from the editor first, then his comments could have reflected some of the information he received. It would have been more powerful, i think, if he had been able to say.... After communicating with the Newletter editor, I understand that there are very few submissions to our newsletter and that we have no editorial policy concerning its content, I now understand why the feature article was published in our newletter and I want to raise some questions about .....

    That would have been, I think, a more effective way to proceed.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Management, Spirituality & Religion
    [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]On Behalf Of Bill M. Cooke
    Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 2:28 AM
    To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter


    The thing is, the original article was published in a public forum, so with
    respect John, I think it not only appropriate, but very healthy that the
    response was too. I have found the ensuing discussion very interesting.

    Bill Cooke

    Quoting John Bunch <jbunch@BENEDICTINE.EDU>:

    > I have followed this discussion with interest. I teach management as well
    > as business ethics and social responsibility. One issue that I do not think
    > has surfaced that I am concerned about concerns how to provide feedback or
    > raise questions about things you are dissatisfied with. Praise publically,
    > provide negative or constructive feedback privately is one of the rules of
    > effective feedback and also denotes respect for the persons involved. What
    > should have been the first step in this inquiry? Personally, I would have
    > recommended communication with the editors of our Newsletter to inquire
    > about the process they used to decide to include the article about Anna.
    > Perhaps communication with the author of the article himself to inquire
    > about what his intended purpose was when he wrote his piece and why he
    > thought the MSR newsletter was an appropriate formum for its publication
    > would have also been a good idea. This correspondence would have very
    > likely generated important information about the issues Prof. Sheep
    > presented in his posting that might have resolved the issues outright or
    > allowed us all to productively discuss his concerns when he presented them.
    >
    > As a first step, however, I question whether a posting to a public forum
    > such as the MSR list was the right move. It seems that that initial
    > posting was based on more that one assumption (i.e. that there was some
    > unstated intent to publishing the article or that the editors explicitly
    > thought about how the article fit with the mission of the group) that
    > require inspection and validation.
    >
    > ANYWAY, as we move forward with the discussion that the posting has
    > generated, I would ask that we keep in mind how the nature of our postings
    > and their tone reflect on MSR as a community.
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]On
    > Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:56 PM
    > To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Lee,
    > I certainly concur. No one should fear the free expression of religious
    > sentiments/beliefs if presented as personal opinion/dialogue and not as a
    > de-contextualized assertion of "truth" claims. As I tried to emphasize in
    > my first e-mail, it is the lack of editorial framing and context that is
    > disturbing (and I mean that very generally, not as a personal disparagement
    > to anyone). In a setting of spiritual/religious pluralism with all of the
    > sensitivities that is bound to imply, it seems to me that everyone should
    > feel welcome to bring something to the table. However, the overall context
    > should be carefully and watchfully preserved as being neutral territory,
    > free of singular or ulterior religious agendas, and thoroughly open to
    > critical review and scientific rigor (as much as we can possibly make it).
    > Preliminary remarks and transparent framing of the purposes behind
    > presenting such material to such an audience is key.
    > Best regards,
    > Mathew
    >
    > Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    > Assistant Professor of Management
    > College of Business
    > Illinois State University
    > Campus Box 5580
    > Illinois State University
    > Normal, IL 61790-5580
    > Phone. (309) 438-3468
    > E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu
    >
    >
    > On 4/16/07, Lee Robbins <LeeRobbins@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > It occurs to me that perhaps the problem was not so much the publication
    > of the article but the context. If we framed it as an interesting variant
    > of religion presented from the perspective of a committed adherent and then
    > asked some questions about the implications for management from the rise of
    > such new variants — rather than a mainstream part of the newsletter — I
    > think it might at least reduce the difficulty.
    > Lee Robbins
    >
    > Dr. Lee Robbins
    > Professor of Management
    > Golden Gate University School of Business
    > 536 Mission St.
    > San Francisco, CA. 94105
    >
    > cell: 415-713-1341
    > 415-552-9800, 415-442-7027
    > work FAX: 415-442-6579
    > <LeeRobbins@post.Harvard.edu >
    > <LRobbins@ggu.edu>
    >
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > From: Stacie Chappell <stacie.chappell@UWA.EDU.AU>
    > Reply-To: < stacie.chappell@uwa.edu.au>
    > Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:24:02 +0800
    > To: < MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    > Subject: Re: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Matthew – Thank you for raising the issues you have below – seems like
    > an opportunity to further define what types of articles/writing are of
    > interest in the newsletter. I understand and generally agree with your
    > reaction, AND part of me thinks that the article does make an interesting
    > contribution – worthy of a newsletter, albeit definitely not written in an
    > academic style or appropriate for a journal. The article claims to
    > introduce the reader to an interesting and powerful individual, and does
    > that through anecdotes and personal reflection – unfortunately, a lot of
    > unsupported assertions are also included. Academic rigor of the article
    > aside, Amma plays a powerful role in spiritual practice around the world. I
    > was introduced to her traveling hug show (by my PHD supervisor no less). She
    > is an interesting person and her ministry, as others, poses a number of
    > questions – definitely worthy of our gentle awareness, the phenomenon
    > perhaps even worthy of more research.
    >
    > A humble opinion,
    > Stacie
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU]
    > On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
    > Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:19 AM
    > To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > Subject: Questions about the Winter MSR newsletter
    >
    >
    > Dear colleagues,
    >
    >
    >
    > Please forgive me, but I must totally misunderstand the purpose of
    > Management, Spirituality, and Religion Interest Group in the Academy of
    > Management. I was under the impression that we are about the scientific
    > study of human spirituality in specific contexts of the management
    > discipline (strategy, organizational behavior, etc.). Bob Giacalone's and
    > Carole Jurkiewicz's opening chapter in their excellent handbook at least led
    > me to believe that.
    >
    > With that understanding, I am completely baffled at the tone and
    > declarations of the "Feature Article" of our most recent newsletter (Winter,
    > 2007): "An Introduction To Mata Amritanandamayi," by Ramnath Narayanswamy.
    > I respect the fact that people can believe whatever they choose to believe,
    > and I uphold religious and spiritual diversity in the highest possible way.
    > If we are ever to realize a "spiritual" workplace that is enhancing to all
    > individuals, then we must respect all faiths—including non-faith—not
    > prescribe one (especially not one that is attached to a specific, singular
    > human being).
    >
    > The MSR Feature Article does not take the position of acknowledging
    > diversity but rather makes a rather bold claim of subsuming all diversity
    > under the "Divine Mother" known as "Amma"—a person who is unequivocally
    > alleged to be the all-knowing ("omniscient") "living Christ." The article
    > states, "She is the living Christ, the pure cosmic intelligence and the
    > living personification of love in action.…the devotee is reminded of the
    > Divine Mother's omniscience."
    >
    > Pronouns in the article referring to Amma are also capitalized, as if
    > she were God (the one God, capitalized), as indeed the article unambiguously
    > asserts: "The Master is none other than God in human form."
    >
    > In her singular person, she is claimed to embody and personify all
    > things spiritual and religious: "Amma is a stunning personification of
    > jnana (enlightenment), bhakti (devotion), karma (selfless service) and raja
    > yoga (contemplative union with the Supreme)." So, are we to believe that
    > all of the major world religions—Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism,
    > Hinduism, etc.—are now superfluous due to their "stunning" confluence under
    > one umbrella—in a singular human, Amma?
    >
    > Am I just now completely crazy, or does it appear strange to anyone else
    > that an article making such claims is presented without qualifiers in an
    > academic newsletter? Could I make equal claims for any other singular
    > human "embodiment," such as Jesus, the Pope, Muhammad, etc., and have it
    > published as a feature in the MSR Newsletter? Are scientific endeavors and
    > claims that a single human being is the "omniscient" Christ compatible with
    > each other?
    >
    >
    > I suppose the enlightenment that I need is to understand why such an
    > article belongs in an academic outlet—unqualified, no disclaimers, no
    > editorial comments that would give credible context or balance to the
    > article. I find this incredible, offensive to world religion and science
    > alike, and inappropriate for the social scientific study of Management,
    > Spirituality, and Religion. It unabashedly advances a particular faith in
    > the Divine claims of a singular human individual. I feel as though I am
    > reading a religious tract hiding under the mantle of a purportedly social
    > scientific newsletter.
    >
    > With respect and good wishes,
    >
    > Mathew
    >
    > --
    > Mathew L. Sheep, Ph.D.
    > Assistant Professor of Management
    > College of Business
    > Illinois State University
    > Campus Box 5580
    > Illinois State University
    > Normal, IL 61790-5580
    > Phone. (309) 438-3468
    > E-mail. msheep@ilstu.edu
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    >



    Bill Cooke
    Senior Lecturer in Organizational Analysis
    Manchester Business School (E29)
    University of Manchester
    Manchester M15 9GH
    44 (161) 306 3411