Tensions to Navigate and Questions to Hold

Be patient toward all that is unsolved in your heart
and try to love the questions themselves,
like locked rooms and like books that are written in a very foreign tongue.
Do not now seek the answers, which cannot be given you
because you would not be able to live them.
And the point is, to live everything.
Live the questions now.
Perhaps you will then gradually, without noticing it,
live along some distant day into the answer.

— Rainer Maria Rilke,
“Letters to a Young Poet”

Supporting spiritual growth is an elusive endeavor even in traditional faith-based settings. Engaging in individual and communal spiritual formation in a workplace presents an additional set of challenges, as the aims of inner work and organizational life can surface frictions and layers of complexity that are not easily resolvable.

Fetzer staff highlight a number of challenges and enduring tensions, many of which have persisted since the Community of Freedom Gathering began. While there are active efforts underway to thoughtfully address and manage these tensions, they are unlikely to be neatly reconciled. Instead, they are invitations to ongoing learning and adaptation for the community and its leaders. As the community matures and shifts, so will the nature of the questions and the community’s capacity to hold inherent pressure points with grace.

Indeed, the ability to hold “both/and realities,” sitting with complexity as individuals and as a community, is actively being cultivated through the COFG. Notably, many participants’ reflections acknowledge the hard-won understanding that often, there is no easy “either/or” answer.

Important tensions the Institute navigates as it cultivates sacred-centered community in the workplace include:

How can spiritual formation in the workplace be at once mandatory and invitational?
What does it take to integrate dedicated spiritual time into the rhythms of the workday and workloads?
How can the realities of workplace power structures and authority be held in a way that supports a sacred-centered organizational culture?
What does it take to accompany individuals on their varied spiritual paths while stewarding an inclusive communal space?
What does it take to balance a commitment to inner growth and serving the outer world?

The following sections delve into each of the above questions, the underlying challenges, and what Fetzer has been learning through trial and error about managing such tensions in the workplace. These tensions are not exhaustive. They are reflective of the challenges that are most prominent in Fetzer’s experience and may be inherent to doing sacred-centered work in a pluralistic organizational context. Similarly, the solutions are not comprehensive or uniform. The appropriate response will inevitably be different for different workplaces.

While some tensions have been effectively addressed within the Institute’s unique context, others remain areas of active learning and adaptation. Fetzer’s thirteen-year journey with the COFG has been marked by multiple iterations in response to an evolving practice and community, serving as a reminder to engage in this work with a spirit of grace, humility, and ongoing curiosity.

1. How Can Spiritual Formation in the Workplace be at Once Mandatory and Invitational?

The Institute’s internal spiritually-grounded work is inseparable from how the organization builds the spiritual foundation for a loving world. It is the organization’s central work, rather than an ancillary benefit of working at Fetzer. In order to prioritize and protect this critical work, participation in Fetzer’s sacred-centered community is compulsory, alongside the expectation that all staff have a commitment to their personal and spiritual growth.

At the same time, spiritual growth cannot be forced. Engagement in the community and its offerings is, by design, invitational. The team that leads the COFG regularly reminds participants that if an upcoming topic, spiritual offering, or practice feels problematic on a personal level, they are free to opt out. According to Director of Spiritual Care Sarah Roelofs, “We are inviting people to participate as fully as they are able by inviting them to stretch, be open and curious, but not to push people towards a breaking point.”

The simultaneous mandatory and invitational nature of Fetzer’s sacred-centered community, while appreciated by many, raises challenges:

Some staff do not feel it is safe to opt out. “You can opt out” is a difficult message to normalize, and individual staff members have differing levels of comfort with choosing not to engage in a practice. As one community member said (and the sentiment was echoed by others), “I know it has been shared that we can step out of a practice if we don’t have the emotional bandwidth to participate, but I don’t think we’ve built a culture where this feels fully doable without sensing that a question or judgment might follow.”

The responsibilities and structures of some jobs makes full participation impossible. On the whole, staff appreciate the protection of time for the Community of Freedom Gathering and the expectation of their engagement. In fact, many community members would like to engage more; an often-heard frustration is the inability of staff in certain roles and locations to fully participate, including members of the culinary and hospitality teams who may need to tend to guests and meals if is there is a separate convening going on, staff supporting tech during full community gatherings, staff who to need to travel and coordinate with external partners, and remote staff.

How Fetzer is approaching the tension of required and not forced participation, as well as structural participation challenges:

Signaling that it is OK to opt out of COFG practices has been a challenge at Fetzer for many years. Gradually, more staff have begun to internalize the message, occasionally choosing to care for themselves by opting out. Other staff see this choice being affirmed and recognize that they, too, can exercise the choice if they so wish. Roelofs underscores that growing community-wide trust is key; trust that individuals are “willing to do the hard and holy” work whether through full community offerings or on their own. Furthermore, Fetzer clearly outlines its expectations for engagement in the COFG when hiring people; having this clarity from the outset and recruiting people who are eager to engage has significantly reduced tensions around mandatory participation, while increasing enthusiasm for the community. According to Organizational Culture VP Shakiyla Smith-Sengu, “All organizations have bodies of work that are central to being employed in that organization, and this is like that. The invitation part is that people get to decide what they participate in, in terms of specific practices and sessions. There is wide spaciousness around people’s developmental journeys at any particular moment. It is mandatory that you do this work, that staff engage in their own development.”

The fact that some staff members have job responsibilities that make them unable to fully and consistently participate is a challenge that cannot be fully resolved. Leaders at Fetzer continue to pay close attention to it and how this structural challenge affects the community and impacts individuals over time. They find that being in direct, open, and ongoing dialogue about it helps so that the entire community can understand what’s going on and collectively hold the challenge.

2. What Does it Take to Integrate Dedicated Spiritual Time into the Rhythms of the Workday and Workloads?

The COFG asks staff to dedicate a full morning every week to slowing down, opening up, and connecting with themselves, their colleagues, and the Sacred. It is a big ask, especially amid full workloads and a hectic workday. Staff are candid about the friction and challenges it can create, including:

Transitioning back to the rest of the workday is often difficult. One staff member describes a “hangover effect” when transitioning between the communal spiritual space and the rest of their workday. Because the world and other commitments do not pause on Tuesday mornings, employees may feel the need to compartmentalize, putting aside other responsibilities in order to be present in the spiritual space while recognizing that doing so will cause a stressful afternoon.

The realities of work can feel at odds with the values being espoused in COFG. At times the rest of people’s jobs may not accommodate the learning and behavioral shifts cultivated on Tuesday mornings. As one participant shared, “I’ve felt moments of resentment when the realities of work make it hard to honor what I’m learning in COFG. It creates a tension between how I want to show up and what the environment sometimes demands.”

How Fetzer is approaching the tension between dedicated spiritual time and full workdays and workloads:

While Fetzer has not tried to eliminate this friction by, say, shortening the COFG or lightening its content, there are efforts to help staff transition back to their workdays and workloads, and integrate their COFG learning. After the COFG, staff share a meal and they can decompress by joining an “After-party” — an optional Tuesday lunch table for debriefing the morning’s session. COFG staff also actively check-in throughout the week with participants for whom the COFG content may have been weighty or activating, and staff can access additional mental health and spiritual direction supports through Fetzer’s holistic employee benefits. Additionally, the alternating full community sessions and individual/small group exploration days are another way to calibrate intensity and integration needs.

Furthermore, balancing dedicated spiritual time and workload is a tension that staff are willing to hold. There is widespread appreciation for the opportunity to pause, to be in community, and to meaningfully participate in spiritual development during the work week. Some see the challenge of bridging the COFG to the rest of their work as natural and welcome: “Sometimes it feels like two jobs. There’s the work and then there’s the “real work.” I think this is a really cool challenge, not a bad one.” For some, this is an honest reflection of the realities of modern life.

3. How Can the Realities of Workplace Power Structures and Authority be Held in a Way that Supports a Sacred-Centered Organizational Culture?

The Fetzer Institute’s very existence as an organization and employer makes power structure inevitable. Roles with different levels of authority facilitate decision-making and day-to-day functioning. As at most organizations, hierarchy surfaces regularly — during staff and leadership transitions, organizational restructuring, supervision and performance reviews, budgeting processes, and throughout daily operations.

At the same time, the Fetzer Institute’s sacred-centered community aspires to be fully inclusive — a space where everyone can engage in the fullness of their humanity, regardless of title or role. On Tuesday mornings, the hope is that staff and leadership can meet one another horizontally — as people, rather than as positions on an org chart.

The concrete realities of organizational hierarchy can feel at odds with the vision of cultivating a sacred-centered community. This present challenges, including:

The hierarchy doesn’t disappear just because COFG asks it to; it is hard coded into organizational life. While many staff and leaders describe COFG as a genuinely horizontal space, the organizational structure that exists the rest of the week doesn’t pause for those three hours. As one staff member observed, “We want to recognize each other and share/show up with the safety that we all belong and are on the same level, but after the three hours of COFG, someone else’s decision can still affect our work, jobs, and livelihood. We could do a better job at acknowledging this so we can navigate it instead of acting like a hierarchy doesn’t exist.”
Power differentials can make it challenging to embrace the aspiration to be “just one of the community.” A senior leader described what they appreciate most about COFG as “the space where I really try to take my organizational hat off and just try to be one of the community.” That experience of shedding a role may not feel as available, or as low-stakes, to someone whose job security or working conditions depend on that leader’s decisions the rest of the week. This challenge can go both ways. Some senior leaders find it hard to entirely show up as “just one of the community;” they guard how they speak in the COFG in order to avoid being misinterpreted or unintentionally influencing the space. It’s tough to completely shed roles and step out of the hierarchy in a workplace setting.

How Fetzer is approaching the tension between hierarchy and sacred-centered culture:

Holding the duality of a hierarchy and a more horizontal, communal space is not an easy tension to hold. As one leader shared, “We have rightly leaned into a more holistic understanding of the human in the workplace,” and therefore, those tensions are going to be deeply felt when there are moments that feel more “like regular corporate work life.” Staff may say, “Wait. I thought we were doing this holistic thing.”

Fetzer continues to grapple with how to honor the realities of organizational life while cherishing the opportunity to engage as humans — not defined by title or role — on Tuesday mornings. It is a complex challenge not easily solved by standard operating procedures. It is managed, in part, by continuing to see colleagues as sacred beings throughout the week, even when authority is being exercised. While moments of friction persist, a number of efforts are helping manage the tension.

For instance, to ensure the sacred-centered culture is not forced, Fetzer’s hiring process is explicit about COFG participation. Senior leaders intentionally take collaborative and relational approaches to decision-making, such as HR’s use of an open forum to address pay equity. Senior leaders also work to model vulnerability and their own humanness by sharing their personal stories on panels and in small groups during the COFG. Staff can share their experience of the dissonance through anonymous surveys, and they are encouraged to openly share their perspectives during community conversations that are designed with an awareness of hierarchy, like fishbowl discussions. Simply connecting in small groups across organizational roles and levels of authority and cultivating relationships as humans is itself a way of skillfully working with the hierarchy. In fact, 64% of staff report that being in sacred-centered community in the workplace contributes significantly to more meaningful relationships with colleagues.

Unless Fetzer sheds the traditional organizational structure — one where there are individuals with more decision-making power — the organization will need to continue to navigate the tension between the workplace power structure and aspirations for a more horizontal community and culture. Sitting in this in-between space presents an ongoing opportunity for more awareness of power dynamics and more conscious use of power, rather than pretending the hierarchy does not exist. Furthermore, the notable impact on employee satisfaction, healthy workplace culture, and, ultimately, the ability to live Fetzer’s mission make it worth the continued effort to hold this “both/and” reality.

4. What Does it Take to Accompany Individuals on Their Varied Spiritual Paths While Stewarding an Inclusive Communal Space?

Fetzer’s Community of Freedom Gathering aims to foster spiritual growth for both the collective and for individuals, within an intentionally pluralistic community spanning many faith traditions and spiritual worldviews. For COFG leaders and facilitators this means stewarding a shared practice without diluting individual traditions, without imposing a “Fetzer religious experience” and while still going deeper over time. It is a complex endeavor that requires navigating challenges such as:

There will never be a single COFG experience that works equally well for everyone. Participants come to COFG from very different starting points on their spiritual paths, and how supported any individual feels will inevitably vary. Bridging from that diversity of paths to a collective spiritual deepening is an ongoing balancing act.
Shared practice in a pluralistic community can default to a diluted or generic spirituality. One participant summed up a shared frustration that “the COFG still emphasizes a generic ‘one size fits all’ spirituality… I know it is difficult but generic spirituality fails to go deeper, in my perspective, and also privileges the [religiously unaffiliated people] over those deeply situated within a particular tradition, and can lean toward a soft universalism.”

How Fetzer is approaching the tension between individual spiritual paths and an inclusive communal space:

For starters, COFG leaders are clear that they must avoid elevating a particular religious tradition or type of spirituality while also avoiding introducing participants to traditions and practices outside their own in a way that oversimplifies those traditions’ sacred nuance. COFG leaders work to craft a common container for Fetzer’s pluralistic community by honoring the diverse spiritual paths, traditions, and experiences that shape community members; for instance, COFG leaders invite staff to share practices they have personally found meaningful, engage facilitators and speakers from diverse religious traditions and spiritual practices, and use a variety of names for the Sacred — such as God, Spirit, Sacred Mystery, the creative unconscious, or more. Leaders also recognize that varied perspectives will inevitably coexist and that it is critical to continuously listen to experiences and feedback from across the community, learn, and adapt. In addition, individual and small group exploration time offers space for community members to go deeper into their own spiritual paths and traditions.

For many, the approach is working. Staff note that Tuesday morning gatherings “accommodate a lot of different learning styles [and] ways of experiencing the Sacred.” And, “no matter our role or background, we’re each able to connect with the COFG at our own pace and depth.”

5. What Does it Take to Balance a Commitment to Inner Growth and Service to the Outer World?

The Community of Freedom Gathering is, at once, an invitation to spiritual development and a shared practice space for living out the Fetzer Institute’s mission. It is not spiritual formation for the sake of spiritual formation, but in service of enacting Fetzer’s mission in the world. The outer work requires the inner work, and yet the question of how much time, energy, and resources should go to each persists. Staff call out the related challenges, including:

Some feel the balance has tipped too far inward. This plays out in a couple different ways. Some people feel that the sessions themselves are too focused on capacity building and spiritual formation for individuals in the community. As one person reflected, “I feel that we have too many sessions that are internally focused on ourselves. I would like to see more focus on the outside world, service to others and what it means to live Fetzer’s mission.” In addition, several community members expressed interest in regularly using Tuesday mornings for direct community service and engagement alongside more financial support from Fetzer to local community organizations.
Strategy sessions feel, to some participants, like they don’t belong in a spiritual gathering. Community members note that “strategy-heavy segments can feel out of place and more like an annual briefing than part of a spiritual gathering,” and that “deepening into strategy work should be housed within staff meetings.” And yet, for staff to fully “live the work,” understanding Fetzer’s strategy is essential — leaving an open question about where, if not the COFG, that understanding should be built.
The wider world doesn’t pause on Tuesday mornings, creating scheduling challenges for staff with significant external-facing responsibilities. Fetzer Institute leaders have to clearly and consistently model their commitment to COFG while also fulfilling responsibilities outside the Institute’s proverbial walls. The challenge is real and unyielding, as are the consequences of, in the words of one employee, “undermining the sense of shared commitment” to the COFG.

How Fetzer is approaching the tension between inner growth and outer action:

There is no one formula for the perfect balance of the inner and outer. Holding the tensions between internal spiritual development and external mission engagement — between nurturing the world within and serving the world outside — requires ongoing care, attention, and experimentation. Continuing to hold the inner and the outer work together is, itself, living Fetzer’s mission.

So what does it take to do so?

Integrating programmatic strategy within the sacred container of the COFG. Despite pushback from some, staff-wide fluency in programmatic strategy is essential if COFG is to be a space for living the work. Furthermore, sessions that integrate programmatic strategy are not intended to merely update staff, but rather to engage the community in offering input and grappling with questions core to the programmatic strategy.
Institutionalizing inner work. Creating the Organizational Culture department with a VP level role to hold and organize it and hiring a Director of Spiritual Care have been important steps in this direction.
Actively applying skills cultivated in the COFG to the outer work. Fetzer is early in its ability to make such links explicit; however there are encouraging indicators, like one staff member who reflected that, “The practices of reflection, listening, and deepened awareness cultivated in our gatherings have directly shaped the way I engage in the world, especially in my volunteer and governance roles.”

Furthermore, there is strong evidence that the inner-work emphasis is bearing fruit: 92% of staff rated COFG as impactful for their spiritual growth, and 66% believe COFG is helping them contribute to societal transformation. The question is not whether the inner work matters, but how to keep it authentically connected to and in balance with the outer work it is meant to serve.