What is the difference between Secular values and Spiritual values in management?

Answer 1

"Secular" means something that's devoid of any involvement, of any kind, with religion.

"Non-secular" means pretty much the exact opposite.

One with "secular values," then, has, by definition, categorically non-religious values.

I'm troubled by the premise of the question, though, because the opposite would be one with "non-secular" (or religious) values...

...and those are not necessarily the same as "spiritual" values. There is, in fact, an entire "spiritual but not religious" movement afoot in the world, these days, which could, would and does fairly-convincingly argue the point that being "spiritual" and being "religious" are two very different things.

If so, then it's possible to have both secular (non-religious) and spiritual (not necessarily either religious or non-religious) values...

...and if that's the case, then the comparison posed in the question is categorically impossible to make.

However, there are many -- particularly in the religious (as opposed to spiritual, but not religious) community -- who believe that being spiritual, but not religious is a distinction without an actual difference; and so they would argue that what the asker clearly meant is whether or not there's a difference between the management styles of one who's secular (non-religious) versus one who's religious (non-secular). They would argue that the asker is using the word "spiritual" to mean "religious;" that for the asker, they're synonymous.

If so, then that's the question: What is the difference between secular values and spiritual/religious values in management?

To answer that, one would have to first make the point that religious belief does not necessarily result in virtue, honesty, a good work ethic, or pretty much anything else that a manager in business would want in an employee. Religion is not required in order for a person to be good. Persons who have no religious beliefs -- who are are, in fact, declared atheists; aka, "secular humanists" -- often cite the so-called "Golden Rule" (always treat others the way you want to be treated by said others) as their reason for being virtuous, honest, and good workers. They insist that the Golden Rule is inherently non-religious/secular; and so religious belief by a worker isn't required in order for said worker to be the kind of good worker which any goiod manager would want.

Of course, the irony of the secular humanists trying to so neatly differentiate the Golden Rule from religious belief is that the Golden Rule, as it happens, is one of the only tenets present, in one form or another, in the sacred texts of all 13 of the world's major religions; and also the vast majority of the literally hundreds -- nay, thousands -- of the lesser ones. But, alas, that is a mere interesting parenthetical aside which doesn't really address the question.

The point is, simply, that religion is not necessary in a worker in order to ensure that s/he will be a good worker.

So, then, if the manager has religious (non-secular) values, he or she is more likely to look for qualities -- religiously-related qualities -- in the worker which may not necessarily be there (especially if said worker is a secular humanist). The lack of said religious qualities in the work may be looked-down upon by the religious manager, who may then let it affect whether the worker gets promoted, or is placed onto a special project team, etc.

If the opposite were true -- that the manager is secular (non-religious), but the worker is religious (non-secular) -- then the manager might find the worker's religious beliefs to be nothing but ridiculous fantasy. In such case, the non-religious manager may think to himself/herself that s/he would not want to promote, or put onto a special project team, any worker who believed in what are, from the manager's perspective, mere Fairy Tales.

Other problems can also exist whenever the manager is religious (non-secular)... problems having to do with the atmosphere of the workplace. If the religious (non-secular) manager allows his/her beliefs to be conspicuously present throughout the workplace, then secular (non-religious) workers may be offended, intimidated, or come to believe that they will not be promoted or put onto special project teams because of their lack of religious belief. A largely-religious workplace can feel very hostile to non-religious workers.

There is, then, in the end, no place for religious/spiritual values in management, and/or in managers, and/or in the workplace. Period.

The workplace, and its workers, should always be managed secularly (non-religiously), even if the manager is religious (non-secular) in his/her private life.

Similarly, workers should, even if they're religious (non-secular) in their private lives, should nevertheless keep it to themselves while at work.

Even if both management and the workers are religious (non-secular), the business should, nevertheless, be run secularly (non-religiously).

And the law of the United States is in sync with all of that by prohibiting employers to allow things like religioin to factor-in, in any way, to management decisions regarding hiring, firing, promotions, etc.

A business run based on religious/spiritual values is a poorly-run business...

...even if it's an inherently religious business... even if it's a church. There is simply no place -- no place -- in the workplace for religion. Period.