S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 7 - 1 S p r i n g 2 0 2 1 7 9 Raysa Geaquinto Rocha (Rooney and McKenna 2007; McKenna and Rooney 2019) because “wisdom has a metaphysical, even spiritual, quality” (Rooney and McKenna 2007, 115). These capabilities must interact with rational and fact-based knowledge to yield practical wisdom (Rooney and McKenna 2007). There is a robust connection between spirituality and practical wisdom in management literature, but the idiosyncrasies of each level ought to be highlight (Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni 2011). Proposition 3 is an innovation in management research, and it addresses the organizational level of constructs: P3: The development of organizational practical wisdom (phronesis) is dependent on organizational spirituality. The propositions derivatives relate the individual and collective levels within the company since they are components of the organizational level. The leader, as the main actor in the promotion of these phenomena (McKenna and Rooney 2019; Nonaka and Takeuchi 2019), is highlighted at the individual level propositions. P3.1: The spirituality of the leader leads to the development of individual practical wisdom. P3.2: Individual spirituality leads to the development of individual practical wisdom. P3.3: Workplace spirituality is related to individual practical wisdom. P3.4: The spirituality of the leader leads to the development of leaders’ practical wisdom. P3.5: Individual spirituality leads to the development of leaders’ practical wisdom. P3.6: Workplace spirituality is related to the development of leaders’ practical wisdom. P3.7: The spirituality of the leader is related to workplace practical wisdom. P3.8: Individual spirituality is related to workplace practical wisdom. P3.9: Workplace spirituality is related to workplace practical wisdom. 6.4 Organizational Spirituality as a Moderator Regardless of all positive arguments, there is an issue concerning organizational spirituality. There is still prejudice about it (Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni 2011). That prejudice, caused by its rhetoric use, make that way of life to be rejected and marginalized by many researchers and practitioners (Karakas 2010a). For example, in the relationship between spirituality and wisdom, leaders usually perceive workplace spirituality as organizational wisdom, but their actions are mostly in the individual domain. Some managers have their reputation and image deteriorated by embracing spirituality because members tend to reject or marginalize spirituality in management (Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni 2011). The theoretical reference above points both to a direct relationship between the three constructs and to a possible moderating role for organizational spirituality. Hence the fourth proposition is conceived: P4: Organizational spirituality moderates the relationship between knowledge management and organizational practical wisdom (phronesis). 6.5 Theoretical Framework The discussion was done as clear, simple, and brief as possible to present the theoretical reasoning of the framework, as recommended by Torraco (2005). New theories ought to be written down and discussed (Ezzy 2002). Accordingly, the proposed theoretical framework (Fig. 1) will lead to further empirical tests. It suggests the connections and influences among the constructs to understand how the relationship between knowledge management (knowledge/knowing, knowledge sharing/creation, shared contexts, and organizational learning), organizational spirituality (leader, individual, and workplace), and organizational practical wisdom (leaders’, individual, and workplace) is. The theoretical framework above emerged from the interpretative process of relating the constructs and their levels presented by the literature. As seen, the literature on these phenomena is still recent and scarce. Nevertheless, it is possible to find studies that begin to relate the themes initially (Bierly, Kessler and Christensen 2000; Nonaka and Takeuchi 2011; Rowley 2006; Nonaka and Takeuchi 2019; Senge 1990). The theoretical framework (Fig. 1) and its propositions are still broad. The refining of ideas will happen according to each culture and industry. Qualitative empirical studies ought to be carried out to understand more deeply the relationship
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=