How Organizational Leaders Negotiate Religious Differences: Frameworks of Mandate and Interpersonal Care

IF 0.8 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Carolina P Seigler, Wendy Cadge
{"title":"How Organizational Leaders Negotiate Religious Differences: Frameworks of Mandate and Interpersonal Care","authors":"Carolina P Seigler, Wendy Cadge","doi":"10.1093/jaarel/lfad044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The religious composition of the United States is rapidly shifting. As institutions and their stakeholders negotiate the needs of an increasingly diverse public, leaders of national chaplaincy organizations offer insight into how actors can effectively understand and engage matters of religious pluralism. This article identifies two distinct institutional frameworks (“mandate” and “interpersonal care”) that provide chaplaincy leaders with different schemas, tools, and strategies to use when understanding and motivating their engagement with religiously diverse publics. Using interviews with sixteen national chaplaincy leaders working in public and private settings, we delineate how institutional leaders interpret, articulate, and fulfill their roles as negotiators of religious differences within their respective frameworks. Our findings allow scholars and leaders to better understand how institutions and their actors can successfully interact with a diversifying, religiously pluralistic public.","PeriodicalId":51659,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF RELIGION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfad044","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The religious composition of the United States is rapidly shifting. As institutions and their stakeholders negotiate the needs of an increasingly diverse public, leaders of national chaplaincy organizations offer insight into how actors can effectively understand and engage matters of religious pluralism. This article identifies two distinct institutional frameworks (“mandate” and “interpersonal care”) that provide chaplaincy leaders with different schemas, tools, and strategies to use when understanding and motivating their engagement with religiously diverse publics. Using interviews with sixteen national chaplaincy leaders working in public and private settings, we delineate how institutional leaders interpret, articulate, and fulfill their roles as negotiators of religious differences within their respective frameworks. Our findings allow scholars and leaders to better understand how institutions and their actors can successfully interact with a diversifying, religiously pluralistic public.
组织领导者如何协商宗教差异:授权框架与人际关怀
美国的宗教构成正在迅速变化。随着机构及其利益相关者就日益多样化的公众需求进行谈判,国家牧师组织的领导人提供了有关行动者如何有效理解和参与宗教多元化事务的见解。本文确定了两种不同的制度框架(“授权”和“人际关怀”),它们为牧师领袖提供了不同的模式、工具和策略,以便在理解和激励他们与不同宗教的公众接触时使用。通过对16位在公共和私人环境中工作的国家牧师领袖的采访,我们描绘了机构领导人如何在各自的框架内解释、表达和履行他们作为宗教差异谈判者的角色。我们的研究结果使学者和领导人能够更好地理解机构及其参与者如何能够成功地与多元化、宗教多元化的公众互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Religion is generally considered to be the leading academic journal in the field of religious studies. Now in volume 77 and with a circulation of over 11,000, this international quarterly journal publishes leading scholarly articles that cover the full range of world religious traditions together with provocative studies of the methodologies by which these traditions are explored. Each issue also contains a large and valuable book review section.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信