Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021;6(3):373-404.
doi: 10.1007/s41463-021-00112-2. Epub 2021 Dec 10.

Cultivating Organizations as Healing Spaces: A Typology for Responding to Suffering and Advancing Social Justice

Affiliations

Cultivating Organizations as Healing Spaces: A Typology for Responding to Suffering and Advancing Social Justice

Reut Livne-Tarandach et al. Humanist Manag J. 2021.

Abstract

Historic inequities exacerbated by COVID-19 and spotlighted by social justice movements like Black Lives Matter have reinforced the necessity and urgency for societies and organizations to bring healing into focus. However, few integrated models exist within management and organization scholarship to guide practice. In response, our focus aims to unpack how organizations can become healing spaces. This paper offers a holistic definition of healing as the foundation for a new conceptual model of organizations as healing spaces. Drawing upon literature from clinical psychology, social psychology, and political science, we identify four perspectives that address healing in organizational contexts: (1) restorative justice, (2) posttraumatic growth, (3) relational cultural theory, and (4) dignity. These healing modalities represent prominent views of how healing can be achieved at the individual, dyadic, organizational, and societal levels. Synthesizing and building on these perspectives, we develop a typology that illustrates three ways organizations can function as healing spaces - Emergent, Endeavoring, and Exemplifying - representing a range of opportunities for how organizations can better respond to suffering. These spaces of healing are differentiated across seven dimensions, including source of harm, recipients of healing, facilitators of healing, focus of healing, length and strength of organizational attention, process of healing, and activators or enablers of healing. This research contributes to organizational healing research and to nascent social justice discussions in the management literature by exploring a range of opportunities for how organizations can better respond to suffering and substantively contribute to remedying harm from systematic bias against marginalized groups via healing.

Keywords: Dignity; Harm; Healing; Organizational healing; Social justice; Suffering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of InterestOn behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Affleck, G., and H. Tennen. 1996. Construing benefits from adversity: Adaptational significance and dispositional underpinnings. Journal of Personality 64 (4): 899–922. - PubMed
    1. Akpapuna, M., E. Choi, D. Johnson, and J. Lopez. 2020. Encouraging multiculturalism and diversity within organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 40 (3–4): 186–209.
    1. Anand, V., B. Ashforth, and M. Joshi. 2004. Business as usual: The acceptance and perpetuation of corruption in organization. Academy of Management Perspectives 18 (2): 39–53.
    1. Armour, M.P., and M.S. Umbreit. 2006. Victim forgiveness in restorative justice dialogue. Victims & Offenders 1: 123–140.
    1. Ashcraft, K. 2013. The glass slipper: “Incorporating” occupational identity in management studies. Academy of Management Review 38 (1): 6–31. 10.5465/amr.2010.0219.

LinkOut - more resources