small issues between agents can pose big problems for the team. Increasing energy ...... in business complexity: Empirical evidence from Romania. International ...
Running head: DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
Diffusing Mindfulness: How Innovating Mindfully Challenges Complexity Andrew Baker
1
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
2 Abstract
As organizations became increasingly complex, employee confusion and uncertainty also increased and became barriers to successful innovation. Complexity worked both for and against the mindful practitioner as she pushed to innovate successfully. This rapid systematic review examined how a mindful practitioner might simultaneously remove barriers and enable emerging innovations using complex innovation systems as mechanisms for successful innovation. This study supported complexity theory, diffusion of innovations theory, and mindfulness as innovative practice. In doing so, this study found an unexplored component of complexity where system challenges and solutions co-evolve. The mindful practitioner understands complex innovation systems using enhanced awareness to hasten innovation by intentionally increasing the heterogeneity of system agents to increase knowledge-sharing. Increased knowledge-sharing speaks to open innovation and provides new ideas and diverse audiences. Increased interdependence between agents hastens interaction and facilitates communication. However, interaction between increasingly heterogeneous and interdependent agents also increases system energy exponentially and can lead to altercation. At critical points, when a team is under stress, small issues between agents can pose big problems for the team. Increasing energy creates more heat than light and the system either collapses completely or emerges as a new pattern. The only difference between outcomes is the manager. Emerging managerial awareness of the whole system provides mindful practitioners advanced knowledge and a predictive recognition of change. Mindful managers display competence and concern for relationships between agents to develop team-level knowledge-sharing and to innovate effectively with new ideas formed by intentionally increasing agent heterogeneity and interdependence.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS Keywords: complex innovation systems, complex leadership theory, complexity theory, diffusion of innovations, innovation management, mindfulness, quantum-based modeling
3
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
4
Diffusing mindfulness: How innovating mindfully challenges complexity The rapid advancement and diffusion of information technology across domains produced complexity operationalized as organizational uncertainty and confusion. Consequently, complexity rendered current management practices obsolete with negative impacts on organizational performance. Accordingly, management sought enduring practical solutions that kept pace with increasing rates of change. Because organizations across domains will continue to face similar challenges that increase with complexity, this study identifies those managerial practices most effective for navigating it. Mindful practice operationalized as enhanced visual acuity and informed decision-making removes barriers to successful innovation by enabling managers to use complexity to generate new ideas. Few studies consider mindful practice diffusible as an innovative solution to organizational challenges posed by increasing complexity which presents a gap in the literature. This rapid systematic review examined how a mindful practitioner might simultaneously remove barriers and enable emerging innovations using complex innovation systems as mechanisms for successful innovation. This study supported complexity theory, diffusion of innovations theory, and mindfulness as innovative practice with applications to high-reliability organizations, technology R&D, and multi-cultural virtual teams. In doing so, this study found an unexplored dimension of complexity where system challenges and solutions co-evolve. Finally, this discourse generated the following research question: How might mindful practice as innovation allow managers to better navigate organizational challenges posed by increasing complexity? Literature Review and Background This study uses diffusion of innovations as a vehicle to understand how mindful practice might operate effectively in complex innovation systems. The lens becomes mindfulness and
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
5
complexity theory and its focus is the innovation literature. Complexity is operationalized as confusion and uncertainty within an organization. Mindfulness is operationalized as enhanced visual acuity, incorporating multiple perspectives, deferring to decision-making grounded in local knowledge, and an emerging awareness of the whole system. Further, this study includes a theoretical framework using combinations of diffusion of innovation, complexity, and mindfulness theories to inform two propositions. These propositions provide additional structural support for the study and evidence from the literature supports each proposition. Evidence is both organized and analyzed by how it operationalizes mindfulness and complexity in the innovation literature, its implications for practice, and its impact on various performance measures. To best answer the RQ, this study formulates propositions iteratively. P1 speaks to diffusion of innovations as complex systems often leading to confusion and uncertainty. Indeed, diffusion of innovations and complexity are combined and reformulated as complex innovation systems. P2 establishes competencies of mindful practice that mitigate confusion and uncertainty allowing for successful diffusion of innovations. These competencies describe innovating mindfully as an effective process necessary to succeed in complex innovation systems. Finally, two latent propositions discussed in the implications sections involve innovating mindfully to enhance both performance and resilience in high-reliability organizations (HROs) and in the technology industry (Mu & Butler, 2009; Sun, Fang, & Zou, 2016; Surendra, 2009; Swanson & Ramiller, 2004). Theoretical Framework innovation and complexity. Roger's seminal work Diffusion of Innovations (1962) defines the DIT model as simply: "(a) the innovation, defined as an idea, practice, or object perceived as new by an individual or
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
6
other relevant unit of adoption, (b) which is communicated through certain channels, (c) over time, (d) among the members of a social system" (Rogers, 1962). Successful adoption occurs when an innovation is: (a) relatively advantageous for the consumer, (b) compatible with existing values, beliefs, and experiences, (c) relatively easy to comprehend and adapt, (d) observable or tangible, and (e) divisible for trial" (Rogers, 2013, p. 4). The DIT and CAS models share similar qualities and innovations diffuse in complex environments called complex innovation systems. It is at point 2 on the S-shaped curve (the inflection point or point of critical mass) where complexity reaches its peak - where the degree of heterogeneity and interdependence of agent/adopters guarantees sustained diffusion, where adaptation rates are highest, where the system is most fit, and where new patterns emerge. The result is a phase-shift. In behavioral science, phase shifts indicate changing social attitudes and behaviors emerging from agent interactions at an elemental level where agent interdependence allows for self-organization and emergence at the system level. It is also at this point where mass behavioral adjustments and the basis for predicting phase shifts become possible in complex innovation systems. Taking into account the entirety, this study proposes: P1:
Innovations in complex innovation systems diffuse in increasingly challenging contexts that result in organizational confusion and uncertainty requiring novel management practices.
innovation and mindfulness. Innovating mindfully involves enhancing visual acuity, incorporating multiple perspectives, deferring to reasoning grounded in local knowledge, and decision-making informed by an incremental awareness of the whole system. Langer (1989) defined mindful practice as "a state in which one is (a) open to see information as new, (b) sensitive to context, (c) creating new
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
7
categories or, (d) aware of more than one perspective (Langer, 1990, p. 307). Findings indicated that "the continuous creation of new categories, openness to new information, and implicit awareness of more than one perspective” be considered key to cultivating effective decisionmaking outcomes (Fiol & O'Connor, 2003, p. 66; Langer, 1997, p. 4). The benefits of mindful practice include: (a) expanded scanning, (b) context-relevant interpretation of internal and external conditions, and (c) discriminating decisions vis-à-vis bandwagons (Fiol and O'Connor, 2003, p. 67). Accordingly, the following proposition is derived from examination of the literature. P2:
Mindful practice improves perceptual acuity and enhances decision-making practices allowing management to innovate mindfully by removing the organizational confusion and uncertainty that become barriers to successful innovation.
Successful innovation in P2 is measured by increasing or decreasing rates of innovation diffusion and adoption. Rates are discussed in terms of degrees of heterogeneity and intensity of interdependent interactions between agents. In closing, evidence from the literature supports the two propositions compounded to best answer the research question:
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS RQ:
8
How might mindful practice as innovation allow managers to better navigate organizational challenges posed by increasing complexity?
Figure 1. Framework relationships: Innovating mindfully (center) uses complexity (green) as a vehicle allowing its user to achieve system awareness (red). Complexity results in confusion and uncertainty acing as barriers to successful innovation (left). Innovating mindfully as emerging system awareness (all reds) removes barriers to achieve successful innovation (right). Method Argument RQ
How might mindful practice as innovation allow managers to better navigate organizational challenges posed by increasing complexity?
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS P1
9
Innovations in complex innovation systems diffuse in increasingly challenging contexts that result in organizational confusion and uncertainty requiring novel management practices.
P2
Improved perceptual acuity and enhanced decision-making practices allowing management to innovate mindfully to remove the organizational confusion and uncertainty that become barriers to successful diffusion of innovations.
IV
Mindful Practice
MV
Complexity
DV
Successful innovation
Innovating mindfully increases the likelihood of successful innovation. Complexity can serve as both vehicle and barrier to attain successful innovation. Thus, complexity serves as a moderating factor between mindful practice and successful innovation. Search Though conducted in a similar manner, each of the two propositions received different search strings. The process was repeated for innovation and complexity and innovation and mindfulness. To increase scope, the first search string was simply innovation AND complexity which not surprisingly yielded 144, 297 articles. Limiting for peer-reviewed articles, in academic journals, in English, from 2013-2017 yielded 190 results. Finally, results were limited to title searches to enhance relevance which yielded 125 studies. In some cases, highly relevant articles were Smartsearched to yield additional results. Results were screened for relevance by scanning
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
10
abstracts for keywords which resulted in 35 studies. The ten most relevant studies were then subject to WoE measures and the five best quality studies were used (see Appendix B). Peer-reviewed articles from scholarly journals were used as they present empirical studies which rate high in Weight of Evidence (WoE) assessment standards (see Appendix C). WoE evaluative criteria are employed as best measures to analyze study quality. High soundness required that all or most of the sections of systematic review were present. High appropriateness meant the study design was sufficient to answer the research question. High relevance meant the study addressed all or most of the topic details including most keywords. Finally, the study includes a PRISMA diagram explaining search criteria and results (see Appendix D). Results P1:
Innovations in complex innovation systems diffuse in increasingly challenging contexts that result in organizational confusion and uncertainty requiring novel management practices. Several of these studies do well to (1) provide the linkages between empirical evidence
and the prevalent use of metaphors and analogy in the innovation literature, and in so doing, (2) shore-up conceptual inconsistencies between complexity and diffusion of innovations. Recent research in the innovation literature calls for more study of both outcomes (Poutanen, Soliman, & Ståhle, 2016). Evidence is analyzed and presented in terms of operationalization of keywords, implications for management, and performance outcomes. A recent systematic review of the innovation literature using complexity theory as a lens yielded twenty usable articles written from 2000-2012 (Poutanen, Soliman, & Ståhle, 2016). This systematic review categorized articles by micro-dynamic, macro-dynamic, and management practice approaches (p. 193). Studies operationalized CT according to perspective and discussed
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
11
the following themes most: edge of chaos, phase shift, emergence and self-organization, coevolution, and complexity regulation (p. 196). Findings indicate those organizations embracing complexity, embracing ambidexterity, and embracing failure helped management most successfully navigate complexity. Several management practices adaptive management and complexity leadership receive treatment as managerial solutions. The study presents complex innovation systems as both a help and hindrance to innovating successfully. The STOP AIDS campaign provides a clear example of how complex processes can be operationalized to hasten diffusion of innovations (Rogers, Una, Mario, & Cody, 2013, pp. 1416). However, negative impacts of innovating in complex innovation systems are not discussed. In this system, the diffusion of innovations in the form of communication campaigns encapsulated safe-sex messaging. The innovation is a behavioral one involving informed decision-making (choosing to practice safe sex) as well as in the latter (choosing to be mindful). Indeed, mindfulness of context (San Francisco in the 1980's, then again in the early 1990s) played a large part in the diffusion of mindful practice (safe sexual practice) presented in the study. Since the 'organization' in this complex innovation systems is the community, the outcome of resilience can be found in more efficient diffusion of information (mindful sexual practices) to not only impact the survival of individual men but also the community as a whole. Another study supports the use of metaphor and analogy as common language comparing a complex innovation systems framework to a social environment (Palmberg, 2009, pp. 484-85). In complex systems, organizational stability becomes the exception and leads to decreased innovation or stagnation. To remain innovative, organizations can increase tensions to achieve change using diversity as a mechanism (p. 487). A school district in Sweden and its activities are first characterized as a complex system - with leveled political, administrative, and professional
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
12
elements - and the study attributes high performance to adaptive management practices; study method and analysis are exceptionally thorough. Results produce a 'systems manager' practice for complex innovation systems in which a (1) clearly formulated mission, (2) follow-up and feedback, (3) diversity and competition, and (4) distribution of authority or control - allow management to use complexity to enhance performance (p. 489). Most managerial practices discussed in the study include the flexibility of thinking and acting inherent to mindful practice. Though negative impacts are mentioned, the value of complex systems for promoting change receive thorough treatment. Another study tested innovation networks in German engineering firms within both simple and complex systems (Heidenreich, Landsperger, & Spieth, 2016, p. 65). Findings indicate that simply adding a network manager can add up to 0.35 for relational performance, 0.30 for structural performance, and even 0.20 for goal achievement performance (p. 66). Network complexity is operationalized in terms of agent organizational and cultural diversity which can create increasing tensions and interpersonal relational problems as heterogeneity increases (p. 59). Findings also indicate that with increased heterogeneity, number of participants, and geographical proximity, the network manager's contribution to relational, structural, and goal performance increases 142%. Practical implications include establishing trust within networks to enhance stability, possessing responsible and moderating personality traits, and allowing substantial network information and communications to flow freely (p. 68). Again, managerial use of complex system mechanisms to moderate change receives thorough treatment. Also discussed is the dissonance teams face in increasingly diverse ccontexts. Another study also examined the moderating role of complexity as an environmental factor affecting inter-domain changes to knowledge couplings and their impacts on firm
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
13
innovation performance during a search (Yayavaram, & Chen, 2015, p. 377-79). The context in this study is technological innovation and changing knowledge domains. Simplicity and complexity in this study are operationalized as the degree of heterogeneity and number of interdependencies of knowledge couplings both within and between domains (p. 394). Couplings between a firm's existing knowledge domains enhance innovation performance more in complex environments since more potential combinations of couplings become available. In this way, the degree of complexity determines which type of knowledge changes are beneficial and when they should be implemented (p. 394). Advice for managers is sparse. Benefits from applying this framework involve (1) contingency recognition during search and recombination strategies and (2) developing technological innovations requires considering coupling relationships between aganets (p. 395). In other words, innovating requires visual acuity, awareness of the terrain, and considering complexities. Nearly every study supporting this proposition either directly or indirectly addresses organizational confusion and uncertainty. Additionally, these studies provide a mixed-review of complexity as both enabler and inhibitor of innovation. One study finds that improved social networking - or networked minds - reduces protective attitudes and limited networking efforts that serve as barriers to knowledge flows (Zubielqui et al., 2016). Yet another study using complexity to improve innovative service at a health care facility recounts very real and disruptive emotional impacts. Further, another two studies indicate that the more complex the innovation, the greater the number of barriers a workgroup has to face in its implementation (Rowe, 2005; Torugsa, 2014). Some studies mention former and existing hierarchal organizational structures and the top-down managerial practices that cannot account for complexity (Palmberg, 2009; Ivanova, 2015; Uhl-bien, 2009). The next proposition asks how
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
14
might mindful practice manage both the negative outcomes and potential performance improvements complexity now provides? P2:
Mindful practice improves perceptual acuity and enhances decision-making practices allowing management to remove the organizational confusion and uncertainty that become barriers to successful diffusion of innovations. Since operative terms in P2 include mindfulness and innovation, supporting evidence
includes those studies operationalizing mindful practice as innovation. Mindfulness-based interventions have been well-purposed in varying fields such as psychology, sociology, neuroscience, mind-body health practices, and education at all levels to treat depression, lowerback pain, ADHD, mood disorders using CBT and MDT, addiction and troubled youth, anxiety, care for seniors, nursing and maternity care, to provide mindful literacy, and to promote mindbody well-being (Hyland, 2015; Hall et al, 2015; Jennings & Apsche, 2014; Dobson, 2016; Anderson & Guthery, 2016; Schutze et al., 2014; Ames et al., 2014). Still, criticisms calling for empirical evidence explaining how innovating mindfully might work in different contexts indicate a valid concern. Research has responded in kind with several rigorous quantitative survey studies including some random control trials and meta-analyses (Hyland, 2015; Salloway & Fischer, 2007; Ray, Baker, & Plowman; 2011; Tonay, Lotan, & Bernstein; 2012; Park, 2013). But what might this mean for the cultivation of mindful practice as a managerial innovation? A deeper look into mindfulness and innovation requires first knowing how the concept has been used in the innovation literature, what the managerial implications might be, and how mindfulness might impact performance. One study discusses the impact of mindful practice on employee emotional reactions to mergers and acquisitions (Charoensukmongkol, 2016). This rigorous quantitative survey study
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
15
(N=114) shows how change might be successfully managed with innovative training that includes mindfulness components (p. 827). Such training might include mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), both of which have been shown to decrease anxieties caused by perceptions of change (p. 827). These mindfulness-based interventions are innovative in the sense that they both advance existing knowledge and alter relationships between perceptions, cognition, and decision-making. Depending upon how trainers implement interventions, managers can enhance employee performance (p. 827). Indeed, one work-based learning (WBL) concept improved 'craftsmen and apprentices' communication and working relationships, emotional resilience, heightened focus and concentration, and enhanced well-being (Hyland, p. 20). A complexity study combining mindful practice and adaptive leadership practices at a mental health clinic found improvements financial stability following decreasing funding (Raney, 2014, p. 12). Adaptive leadership allowed the center to cultivate agility and resilience in adversity using mindful practices to better direct resources (p. 12). Mindfulness allowed staff to remain, "present-oriented and reflective, willing to cultivate uncertainty, and to approach operational and client care practices from a non-judgmental frame of mind" (p. 12). This study involves navigating complexity to improve practice with decreasing funding. Increasing staff operational awareness to duties led to novel solutions and supported the rigorous 'embracing of complexity' required to develop agility and achieve resilience to negative environmental variables (p. 319-320). Across studies discussed so far, ambidexterity has emerged as an essential skill to improve innovation performance. A recent random control trial (N=239) testing the impacts of both MBIs and meditational practices on workplace stress reduction found significant improvements to autonomic tone.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
16
Improvements to autonomic function might be associated with greater psychological and physiological adaptability (Wolever et al., 2012, p. 255). This study innovates by being one of the first to provide evidence from an RCT indicating effects of mindful practice on biological systems. Interventions in (a) person-to-person classes, (b) in group sessions, and (c) online, improved participation, set the stage for future repeated interventions, were more accessible and more helpful to more people, and provided a highly cost-effective and innovative alternative to traditional training programs (p. 255). Although no statistically significant improvements to productivity were indicated, the study did not test cognitive variables that might impact such assessments. However, evidence linking MBSR programs to productivity improvements are documented in the literature (pp. 250; 256). Significant changes to staff autonomous systems might also indicate possible increases to staff adaptability (p. 255). A more highly adaptable employee and workplace might be better able to perform more tasks, in more contexts, which might also improve productivity. Indeed, biological relationships between mindful practice and adaptability have implications for managerial performance and emerging fitness in complex systems. It is clear from these studies that mindful practice can result in more than stress and anxiety reduction interventions. Adaptability and adoptability are both attribute and outcome of complex innovation systems that self-organize to attain an emergent fitter system. Fit innovation systems successfully innovate by removing barriers and advantaging diffusion processes to maximize adoption rates. Mindful practice cultivates recognition of increasing heterogeneity and interdependence between agent adopters where sustainable systems indicate fitness levels. Put simply, fit systems innovate successfully and fitness can be attained by mindful attention to agent interactions and adaptability. Sustainable systems speak to innovating mindfully as a
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
17
matter of course. Though at odds, mindful routines allow for systematic and sustainable innovation where focus on the present and concern for embracing complexity integrate control and flexibility. Taken together, these practices create a mindfulness culture reliant upon systematic routinization for sustained mindful innovation (Swanson and Ramiller, 2009, pp. 1819). Discussion This study analyzed evidence from the innovation literature to support two propositions. Analysis included identifying how keywords and concepts were operationalized, what the implications were for management, and how operative terms impacted various performance measures. Synthesis of these processes is probably best accomplished with progressive illustrative models. The purpose of this exercise is to show (1) how innovative management solutions might co-evolve with increasing complexity, (2) how such practices might enable managers to navigate the consequent confusion and uncertainty, (3) how complexity might be used to advance diffusion of innovations, (4) and how mindful practice might help do so. Indeed, the attributes of mindful practice fit well as solutions to challenges posed by complexity. Mindfully enhanced visual acuity involves highly focused environmental scanning and the related ability to recognize approaching phase shifts. Enhanced perception presents a nearly tailored solution to navigate complexity's "large sets of interacting elements that perpetually affect other elements and subsystems," "open and undefined system boundaries," and "agent ignorance of the whole system." Further, "modulated interaction with immediate neighbors" and "open and undefined system boundaries", requires a "deference to decision-making grounded in local knowledge." Further still, "incorporating multiple perspectives" might handle very effectively "emergent self-organization and "large sets of interacting elements that perpetually
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
18
affect other elements and subsystems". Finally, "decision-making informed by emergent awareness of the whole system" involves cognizance of system "non-linearity", "disequilibrium", and impending "phase shifts" requiring acute focus on present conditions (Langer, 1998, Weick & Sutcliffe, 2003; Swanson & Ramiller, 2004; Cilliers, 1998, p. 275). While relationships as stated draw from relatively weak associations, researching mutual development of the concepts in the literature might prove beneficial. Concept Model 2
Figure 1. Complexity Model - Increasing complexity caused challenges to research integrity that co-evolving EBM solved with SR as diffusing mindful practice. Model Narrative
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
19
Concept Model 2 provides fairly accessible observable evidence for claims made in this study. Increasing complexity in the research industry caused challenges to research integrity that EBM - operationalized as SR - as an innovative mindful practice might solve. Further, increasing complexity in the publishing industry - operationalized as IT-enabled online publishing produced barriers to publication in the form of uncertainty and confusion. SR might solve the challenges occurring at both levels (confounding and conflated research methods, and unnecessarily confusing research publication practices) as it diffuses and gets adopted at an increasing rate. Rules inherent to CASs might explain how this occurs. In essence, complexity in the research publication industry fueled by increasing technological advancements produced both the challenges faced by researchers trying to publish and the mindful practice found in EBR that provides clear and systematic instructions to achieve publication. One implication might be that producing an SR will make publication more likely because it answers the challenge a complex system produced simultaneously to solve it. It should be noted that this process is not described in the literature as a characteristic of complexity but is being proposed in this paper to explain a fairly evident phenomenon. For instance, consider what is meant when one says "the solution will present itself." Though complexity theory cannot account for bricolage, there are newer models that might.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
20
Concept Model 2
Model Narrative. Complexity works both for and against the mindful practitioner as he pushes to innovate successfully. As organizations become increasingly complex, employee confusion and uncertainty also increase and become barriers to successful innovation. However, the mindful practitioner who understands complex systems can use enhanced awareness to hasten innovation by intentionally increasing the heterogeneity of system agents to increase knowledge-sharing. Increased knowledge-sharing speaks to open innovation and provides new ideas and diverse audiences. Increased interdependence between agents hastens interaction and facilitates communication. However, increased communication between increasingly diverse agents also
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
21
increases system energy exponentially and can lead to altercation. At critical points, when the team is under stress, small issues between agents can pose big problems for the team. Increasing energy creates more heat than light as panic and the system either collapses completely or emerges as a new pattern. The only difference between outcomes is the manager. Emerging managerial awareness of the whole provides mindful practitioners advanced recognition of change. Knowing how to mitigate confusion and uncertainty by cultivating an acute sense of the present environment establishes resourcefulness. In MCVTs mindful managers display competence and concern for relationships between agents to develop both cognitive and affective trust. Cognitive trust establishes team lead competence providing further opportunity to establish binding affective trust. Trust re-establishes team knowledge-sharing and allows diverse teams to innovate better with new ideas because of differences. In MCVTs, appreciating commonalities comes before explorations of differences. Finally, recurrences feedback provides an everchanging landscape making stability the exception and managerial agility paramount. In MVCT contexts, the mindful ability to see from increasingly diverse multiple perspectives is operationalized as cultural intelligence. Organizational complexity in its simplest form means a lot of moving parts, coming from all directions, from various places, all with different characteristics requiring managerial integration and synthesis to provide solutions. Nowhere is this more evident at the macro-level than with globalization, and nowhere does globalization manifest more at the micro-level than in multi-cultural virtual teams (MCVTs). In this sense, MVCTs might function best as laboratories for testing the ability of various managerial techniques to effectively address complexity. Complexity in the form of increasing variation, diversity, heterogeneity, and adaptability causes the stress and anxiety. Before cooperation can emerge, the integration of various cultures
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
22
throughout the workplace will increase existing uncertainties, leading to confusion and potential altercation, both measurable and predictable by rates of change in a given system. Complexity measurements of change involve the degree of heterogeneity in systems like MCVTs (contextual), while measurements of intervention diffusion as intentional change involve degree of agent interdependence. Put simply, the greater the diversity of a team setting, the greater the chance for dissonance. Interventions focusing on cooperation or agent interdependence might diffuse information with effective communication. Indeed, effective interventions and innovations depend upon effective system communication measurable by adoption/adaptation rates. This means cooperation and integration require effective communication for knowledge to diffuse. Indeed, this formulation is best observed in highly dynamic contexts like HROs where self-organization can emerge from seeming chaos as organizational resilience. This is also the case in the tech industry where rates of change continue to increase and where innovating successfully means innovating mindfully. A need for enhanced social networking and innovative forms of effective communication might explain the emergence of social media as a communication bridge. The absence of effective communication as decreasing knowledgesharing within and between systems is disequilibrium, chaos, and non-linearity causing an elemental ignorance of the whole system. As communications theory, DIT does well to explain communication deficiencies. Conversely, enhancing visual acuity, incorporating multiple perspectives, deferring to decision-making grounded in local knowledge, and adding an incremental awareness of the system acts as a communication enhancement in complex systems. This occurs because mindful practice inherently 'decreases' rates of change perceptually for
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
23
management to better discern evolving patterns of change, to make informed decisions, and to respond behaviorally by supporting knowledge-sharing networks. Implications for Scholarship This study supports complexity theory and diffusion of innovations theory simultaneously by combining the constructs and applying each to innovation studies as complex innovation systems. Indeed, diffusion of innovation models are complex adaptive systems presenting both benefits and challenges to management. Further, the idea of innovating mindfully - borrowed from Swanson & Ramiller (2004) - operationalizes mindfulness as the more general mindful managerial practice discussed throughout the study to indicate that mindful practice can be applied to several contexts outside the innovation literature. Furthermore, knowing how the mindfulness concept diffused throughout the management literature, or how management theories in general do so historically, can provide opportunities to explore new concepts as they develop. For instance, consider the notion that mindfulness and complexity theory co-developed and that this in some way explains their present complementarity. How might applying complexity theory to the research and publication industry provide insight into how our theoretical knowledge is generated? Appropriating and applying models from domains other than those from which they originated is nothing new. Looking at relationships between mindful practice and participant observation (borrowed from cultural anthropology) can guide its effective use in organizational contexts. To avoid routinizing mindful practice through training and other behavioral applications, appealing to the vast literature on participant observation might strengthen its use in organizational contexts. It also might prove beneficial to consider complexity theory as intercessor between linear models of
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
24
time and change represented by quantum modeling. This concept will be explored more in for future study. Finally, considering cooperation and integration as communications theories might find immediate application to multi-cultural virtual teams. Before team cooperation and integration can occur, a metaphorical phase shift must first occur. As teams become more diverse, the interaction between heterogeneous agents increase. This increasing diversity creates disequilibrium, operationalized as dysfunctional teams, and results either in the dissolution of the team system or with appropriate external interventions. In either case, a new team system emerges. These interventions create cooperation through managed integration and recursive appreciation for team diversity for the sake of gaining new knowledge. Indeed, innovating mindfully evolves fitter systems. Implications for Practice Nowhere is mindfulness as fitness enhancement presented more than in chaotic settings characterized by increasing complexity. Therefore, discussion of its use in both HROs and IT innovation management settings best illustrates its effectiveness. Additionally, mindful practice might enhance existing practices such as adaptive and complexity leadership. mindfulness and complexity. Improved perceptual acuity and enhanced decision-making practices allow management to remove the organizational confusion and uncertainty that become barriers to successful diffusion of innovations. Karl Weick's work on mindfulness and high-reliability organizations (HROs) identified several characteristics of resilient organizations to include: a preoccupation with failure, reluctance to simplify interpretations, sensitivity to operations, commitment to resilience, and fluidity of decision-making structures (p. 33). Weick closes with some
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
25
suggestions for organizations to improve reliability using mindful practice: cultivating humility, seeking variety, inventing new models, being flexible, building excess capacity, and questioning assumptions (p. 38). innovating mindfully in complex innovation systems. Innovating mindfully with improved perceptual acuity and enhanced decision-making practices adds value by enabling the successful diffusion of innovations to increase organizational performance. Swanson and Ramiller (2004) discuss innovating mindfully within a complex innovation system (IT). IT innovation diffusion occurs in a complex innovation system which hastens the diffusion process making performance outcomes clearer. Two central tenants of mindful practice recurred throughout the study: innovating with reasoning grounded in its own organizational facts, and cultivating the visual acuity necessary to see multiple perspectives (Swanson & Ramiller, 2004, p. 559). Factors impacting successful innovation and improved performance in the technology industry include: (1) the nature of the innovations themselves, (2) the reception of the corresponding organizing visions in the larger community, (3) the normative force that diffusion imparts in its own right, and (4) firm characteristics (p. 557). Since mindful practice has met these conditions both within and outside the innovation literature, it can be considered a managerial innovation. complexity leadership. Complexity leadership draws from adaptive leadership, administrative leadership, and enabling leadership to facilitate the creative, adaptive, and learning capacities required to navigate complex settings. Complexity leaders enable conditions and manage the innovation-toorganization interface by disentangling leadership types to provide an emergent, interactive, and adaptive environment (Uhl-bien, Russ, and McKelvey, 2014, p. 306). Complexity leadership
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
26
originates from knowledge producing contexts and reflects the relationship between typical bureaucratic and administrative functions and the emergence characteristic of complex systems (p. 298). Complexity leadership is a response to increasingly obsolete top-down, control-driven management structures that can stifle innovation and system fitness especially in complex settings (Uhl-Bien et al., 2009). To be effective, managing complex innovation systems requires using complex environments to achieve successful innovation. This also means mitigating its negative outcomes to do so. Complexity leadership disentangles then employs adaptive leadership to enable change by harnessing conflict-laden interaction between agents which allow innovations to emerge. Administrative structures and leadership do not account for complexity and might be bettersuited to address employee confusion and organizational uncertainty. Mindfulness as an adaptive strategy can address these negative outcomes preventatively. Enhanced visual acuity and decision-making mean encouraging agent interaction and continued learning to attain an emerging awareness of the whole. Mindfulness can facilitate better awareness of all system components. Indeed Weick and Sutcliffe's (2000) sensitivity to operations and fluidity of decision-making structures reflect these processes. participant observer. Though mindful practitioners must engage system elements to innovate successfully, seeing system processes and details requires attaining a high degree of objectivity; complexity involves an increasing number of details entering awareness from multiple directions. Knowledge of more detail means better-informed decisions. These details manifest from interaction between agents. A mindful practitioner encourages emerging change as innovation using multiple perspectives to determine organizational direction. Borrowing technique from
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
27
cultural anthropology provides an empirical framework for both conceptualizing and operationalizing participant observation as mindful practice. Implications are far-reaching since an existing empirical framework might explain how mindful practice works. For example, the perceptual outcomes from innovating mindfully reflect the difference between a low-res and high-res picture. One can get a better sense of content or action from a greater distance and decide in advance to either change the channel or let the plot of the story play out. Observers positioned too close due to poor definition view an increasingly fuzzy picture, receiving less detail, and inevitably missing the plot. Limitations Critics cite commercialization of mindfulness as a primary reason for its proliferation and the main cause for the dampening down of its more holistic qualities as a mindset and lifestyle. Further, criticisms suggest mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) de-contextualize training from its affective and ethical underpinnings with surface-only focus upon stress reduction and present-moment awareness (Hyland, 2015, p. 1). Indeed, this is a repeated similar criticism to any novel education practice concerned with the sustainability of instruction outcomes. However, it is not clear why mindful practice need be concerned with ethical or affective dimensions of the concept, how these dimensions affect its sustained presence for employees, nor how mindful-based training is made more effective by being philosophically meaningful. It is also unclear that users be obliged to develop the moral components of the practice for its more prescriptive and beneficial use in organizational training. Another criticism suggests that most of what complexity theory purports to explain can be explained equally well by standard systems theory. Further, critics state that complexity theory is unnecessarily applied to the innovation literature because open innovation better
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
28
addresses challenges to innovating (Poutanen, Soliman, & Ståhle, 2016). However, though some of the same language can be found in both systems theory and complexity theory, several components allowing for emergence, self-organization, and predictive possibilities are missing from standard systems theory. Further, complexity theory does not distinguish between innovation and open innovation since complex system boundaries are perpetually open by definition of the concept. The number of concepts employed in this study made synthesis difficult and the degree of theory integration required of the exercise revealed the limitations of the study. Secondly, considering mindful practice as diffusible innovation, and considering its impact on successful innovation through related variables, are not the same things. Since research on mindful practice diffused as innovation is limited, more theoretical discussion of the topic and conceptual studies are required before a stronger case can be made with evidence from the literature. An RSR does not afford the depth of research required of the topic. Lastly, mindful practice implies routinization even though reliance on routine can lead to mindless actions. Consequently, incorporating mindfulness as a systematic practice used organizationally means developing its perceptual and cognitive components over more programmed behavioral applications (Swanson & Ramiller, 2009). Conclusion This study finds supports for both propositions to effectively address the research question with evidence from the literature. Complex systems cause organizational confusion and uncertainty and provide both the challenges and solutions to achieving successful innovation. Practitioners innovate mindfully by developing the visual acuity and decision-making competencies to remove barriers to successful innovation. Since successful innovation can be
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
29
measured by the extent of its diffusion and corresponding adoption rates, mindful managers use knowledge of complex systems to increase agent interaction and improve knowledge-sharing to generate new ideas; mindful managers know that increasing system diversity and density of interactions also increases diffusion rates. It is at this point of criticality that mindful managers dance at the edge of chaos by simultaneously creating an environment that allows innovations to emerge while removing barriers that hinder innovation before diffusion can occur. In the same way complex innovation systems contain the attributes of combined complexity and diffusion of innovations, mindful practitioners use combined perceptual acuity, multiple perspectives, and contextually informed decision-making to gain an emerging awareness of the whole system. This awareness enables practitioners to recognize patterns in the chaos predictively as approaching phase shifts and react accordingly. Finally, this study found that though cooperation and integration allow for innovation, innovating successfully in complex systems first requires increasing tensions between increasingly diverse agents to enhance knowledge-sharing while simultaneously managing relationship tensions between agents. Implications for Future Research
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
30
Figure 3. Quantum models require no fixed point of reference to conceptualize time and change. Innovations in physics provide models that might transfer sense through metaphor and analogy to advance knowledge in the behavioral sciences. For instance, application of complexity theory to the innovation literature and across the behavioral sciences is beginning to do so successfully by providing innovative management practices to better address increasing complexity. How might a quantum model enhance application of diffusion of innovations theory, complexity theory, and mindfulness applications in the innovation literature? What might it mean for management? (See Appendix A) Discussion of how concepts like complex systems and mindfulness co-evolve by virtue of the system in which they occur should continue. Combined with the idea that CASs might simultaneously provide challenge and solution as part of the self-organizing process lends support to claims of system predictability as an outcome of emergence and phase shifts. As mentioned, this might help public health organizations disseminate vital information at times best for successful diffusion.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
31
Finally, cognitive dimensions of mindfulness require further research. Advances in neuroscience, neural networks, and cognitive science offer conceptual frameworks and metaphors for exploring and explaining the psychological and biological underpinnings of the practice. Examining the relationship between a mindful practitioner and an emerging awareness of the complex system in which they operate could extend the discussion into the realm of philosophy and transcendental meditation.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
32 References
Allen, P. (2014). Evolution: Complexity, uncertainty and innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24(2), 265-289. doi:10.1007/s00191-014-0340-1 Ames, C. S., Richardson, J., Payne, S., Smith, P., & Leigh, E. (2014). Innovations in Practice: Mindfulness‐based cognitive therapy for depression in adolescents. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 19(1), 74-78. doi:10.1111/camh.12034 Barnert, E. S., Himelstein, S., Herbert, S., Garcia‐Romeu, A., & Chamberlain, L. J. (2014). Innovations in Practice: Exploring an intensive meditation intervention for incarcerated youth. Child And Adolescent Mental Health, 19(1), 69-73. doi:10.1111/camh.12019 Brown, C. (2008). The use of complex adaptive systems as a generative metaphor in an action research study of an organisation. Qualitative Report, 13(3), 416-431. Retrieved from http://tqr.nova.edu/ Byrne, J., Hauck, Y., Fisher, C., Bayes, S., & Schutze, R. (2014). Effectiveness of a mindfulness‐ based childbirth education pilot study on maternal self‐efficacy and fear of childbirth. Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 59(2), 192-197. doi:10.1111/jmwh.12075 Capel, C. (2014). Mindfulness, indigenous knowledge, indigenous innovations and entrepreneurship. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 16(1), 63-83. doi:10.1108/JRME-10-2013-0031 NA Charoensukmongkol, P. (2016). The role of mindfulness on employee psychological reactions to mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(5), 816831. doi:10.1108/JOCM-05-2015-0068
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
33
Chong, W., Bian, D., & Zhang, N. (2016). E-marketing services and e-marketing performance: the roles of innovation, knowledge complexity and environmental turbulence in influencing the relationship. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(1-2), 149-178. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2015.1102758 Cilliers, P. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism. Understanding complex systems' reply to David Spurrett. South African Journal of Philosophy, 18(2), 275-298. doi: 10.1080/02580136.1999.10878188 Corral de Zubielqui, G., Jones, J., & Statsenko, L. (2016). Managing innovation networks for knowledge mobility and appropriability: A complexity perspective. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 6(1), 75-109. doi:10.1515/erj-2015-0016 Dobson, K. S. (2016). New frontiers in cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 9(2), 107-123. doi:10.1521/ijct.2016.9.2.107 Fay, B. (2008). Case study: Is high reliability organizing the next best thing? you decide. Fire Management Today, 68(2), 28-29. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/fmt Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2003). Waking up! mindfulness in the face of bandwagons. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 54–70. doi:10.5465/amr.2003.8925227 Fontana, M. (2014). Pluralism(s) in economics: lessons from complexity and innovation. A review paper. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24(1), 189-204. doi:10.1007/s00191013-0333-5. Geer-Frazier, B. (2014). Complexity leadership generates innovation, learning, and adaptation of the organization. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 16(3), 105-116. Retrieved from https://journal.emergentpublications.com/
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
34
Gotink, R., Hermans, K., Geschwind, N, De Nooij, R, De Groot, W., & Speckens, A. (2016). Mindfulness and mood stimulate each other in an upward spiral: a mindful walking intervention using experience sampling. Mindfulness, 7(5), 1114-1122. doi:10.1007/s12671-016-0550-8 Haffeld, J. (2012). Facilitative governance: Transforming global health through complexity theory. Global Public Health, 7(5), 452. doi:10.1080/17441692.2011.649486 Hall, M. P., O'Hare, A., Santavicca, N., & Jones, L. F. (2015). The power of deep reading and mindful literacy: An innovative approach in contemporary education. Journal of Educational Innovation, 15(67), 49-62. Retrieved from http://www.inderscience.com/jhome.php?jcode=ijiie Heidenreich, S., Landsperger, J., & Spieth, P. (2016). Are innovation networks in need of a conductor? Examining the contribution of network managers in low and high complexity settings. Long Range Planning, 49(71). doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2014.03.003 Heshan, S., Yulin, F., & Haiyun (Melody), Z. (2016). Choosing a fit Technology: understanding mindfulness in technology adoption and continuance. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(6), 377-412. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/ Hyland, T. (2015). McMindfulness in the workplace: vocational learning and the commodification of the present moment. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 67(2), 219. doi:10.1080/13636820.2015.1022871 Issel, L., & Narasimha, K. (2007). Creating complex health improvement programs as mindful organizations: From theory to action. Journal of Health, Organization and Management, 21(2), 166-183. doi:10.1108/14777260710736859
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
35
Ivanova, I. A., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). Knowledge-generating efficiency in innovation systems: The acceleration of technological paradigm changes with increasing complexity. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 96(2), 254-265. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.04.001 Jalonen, H. (2015). Dancing with the paradox - Social media in innovation through complexity lens. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(1), doi:10.1142/S1363919615500140 Jennings, J. L., & Apsche, J. A. (2014). The evolution of a fundamentally mindfulness-based treatment methodology: From DBT and ACT to MDT and beyond. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation And Therapy, 9(2), 1-3. doi:10.1037/h0100990 Jörg, T., & Hughes, S. A. (2013). Harnessing the complexity of innovation. International Journal of Knowledge & Systems Science, 4(3), 1. doi:10.4018/ijkss.2013070101 Katz, J. S. (2016). What is a complex innovation system? Plos ONE, 11(6), 1-24. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/ Kumari, M., & Kulkarni, M. S. (2016). A complexity based look-ahead mechanism for shop floor decision making. Procedia CIRP, 41, 63-68. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.12.032 Laland, K. N., Boogert, N., & Evans, C. (2014). Niche construction, innovation and complexity. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 11, 71-86. doi:10.1016/j.eist.2013.08.003 Langer, E. J. (1993). A mindful education. Educational Psychologist, 28(1), 43–50. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2801_4
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
36
Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000). Mindfulness research and the future. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 129–139. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00155 Langer, E.J. (1989). Mindfulness. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books Group. Langer, E.J. (1997). The power of mindful learning. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books Group. Mastrogiorgio, M., & Gilsing, V. (2016). Innovation through exaptation and its determinants: The role of technological complexity, analogy making & patent scope. Research Policy, 45(14) 19-1435. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.003 Matei, A., & Antonie, C. (2015). Complexity theory and the development of the social innovation. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 18(5), 61-66. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.371 Mendes, M., Curral, L., Gomes, C., Marques-Quinteiro, P., & Lind, P. (2016). Promoting learning and innovation in organizations through complexity leadership theory. Team Performance Management, 22(5-6), 301-309. doi:10.1108/TPM-02-2016-0004 Mu, E., & Butler, B. S. (2009). The assessment of organizational mindfulness processes for the effective assimilation of IT innovations. Journal of Decision Systems, 18(1), 27-51. doi:10.3166/jds.18.27-51 Nan, N., Zmud, R., & Yetgin, E. (2014). A complex adaptive systems perspective of innovation diffusion: An integrated theory and validated virtual laboratory. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 20(1), 52-88. doi:10.1007/s10588-013-9159-9 Nesvetailova, A. (2014). Innovations, fragility and complexity: Understanding the power of finance. Government and Opposition, 49(3), 542-568. doi:10.1017/gov.2014.12
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
37
Palmié, M., Zeschky, M., Winterhalter, S., Sauter, P., Haefner, N., & Gassmann, O. (2016) Coordination mechanisms for international innovation in SMEs: effects on time-tomarket and R&D task complexity as a moderator. Small Business Economics, 46(2), 273294. doi:10.1007/s11187-015-9683-8 Pelc, K. I. (2014). Adoption process and complexity of innovation in social networking. Journal of Management & Engineering Integration, 7(1), 92. Retrieved from http://archive.csustan.edu/market/petrosky/iems/jmei.html Poutanen, P., Soliman, W., & Ståhle, P. (2016). The complexity of innovation: An assessment and review of the complexity perspective. European Journal of Innovation Management, 19(2), 189-213. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journal/ejim Rahmandad, H., & Sterman, J. (2008). Heterogeneity and network structure in the dynamics of diffusion: Comparing agent-based and differential equation models. Management Science, (5). 998. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/journal/mnsc Ramiller, N. C., & Swanson, E. B. (2009). Mindfulness routines for innovating with information technology. Journal of Decision Systems, 18(1), 13–26. doi:10.3166/jds.18.13-26 Ramiller, N. C., & Swanson, E. B. (2009). Mindfulness routines for innovating with information technology. Journal of Decision Systems, 18(1), 13-26. doi:10.3166/jds.18.13-26 Raney, A. (2014). Agility in adversity: Integrating mindfulness and principles of adaptive leadership in the administration of a community mental health center. Clinical Social Work Journal, 42(3), 312-320. doi:10.1007/s10615-014-0487-0
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
38
Ray, J. L., Baker, L. T., & Plowman, D. A. (2011). Organizational Mindfulness in Business Schools. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 188-203. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2011.62798929 Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovationss (1st Ed.). New York, NY: Free Press of Glencoe. Rogers, E. M. (1976). New product adoption and diffusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 2(4), 290. Retrieved from http://www.ejcr.org/ Rogers, E. M., Una E., M., Mario A., R., Cody J., W., (2013). Complex adaptive systems and the diffusion of innovationss. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 10(3), 2-26. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu. Rowe, A., & Hogarth, A. (2005). Use of complex adaptive systems metaphor to achieve professional and organizational change. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(4), 396-405. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03510.x Schultz, R. (2014). Adjacent opportunities: mindful complexity. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 2(1), 169. Retrieved from http://journal.emergentpublications.com/ Schütze, R, Thornton, J., Finlay-Jones, A., Rees, C., Slater, H., & O'Sullivan, P. (2014). Mindfulness-based functional therapy: A preliminary open trial of an integrated model of care for people with persistent low back pain. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(8), doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00839 Shirey, M. (2007). Educational innovations. An evidence-based solution for minimizing stress and anger in nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(12), 568-571. Retrieved from http://www.healio.com/nursing/journals/jne
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
39
Siqueira, R. P., & Pitassi, C. (2016). Sustainability-oriented innovations: Can mindfulness make a difference? Journal of Cleaner Production, 1391181-1190. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.056 Solloway, S. G., & Fisher Jr., W. P. (2007). Mindfulness practice: A Rasch variable construct Innovation. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8(4), 359. Retrieved from http://jampress.org/ Sorrell, J. M. (2015). Meditation for older adults: A new look at an ancient intervention for mental health. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing And Mental Health Services, 53(5), 1519. doi:10.3928/02793695-20150330-01 NA Sun, H., Fang, Y., & Zou, H. (. (2016). Choosing a fit technology: Understanding mindfulness in technology adoption and continuance. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(6), 377-412. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/ Surendra, N. C. (2009). Agile development as an enabler of mindful IT innovation adoption: Lessons from an action research project. Journal of Decision Systems, 18(1), 99-115. doi:10.3166/jds.18.99-115 Swanson, E. B., & Ramiller, N. C. (2004). Innovating mindfully with information technology. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 553-583. Retrieved from Retrieved from http://www.misq.org Tanay, G., Lotan, G., & Bernstein, A. (2012). Salutary proximal processes and distal mood and anxiety vulnerability outcomes of mindfulness training: A pilot preventive intervention. Behavior Therapy, 43(1) 492-505. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2011.06.003
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
40
Taylor, T., & Tainter, J. (2016). The nexus of population, energy, innovation, and complexity. American Journal of Economics And Sociology, 75(4), 1005-1043. doi:10.1111/ajes.12162 Thomas, D. (2008). Teaching mindfulness to wildland firefighters. Fire Management Today, 68(2), 38-39. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/fmt/ Torugsa, N., & Arundel, A. (2014). Complexity of innovation in the public sector: A workgrouplevel analysis of related factors and outcomes. Public Management Review 18(3) doi10.1080/14719037.2014.984626 Valorinta, M. (2009). Information technology and mindfulness in organizations. Industrial & Corporate Change, 18(5), 963. doi:10.1093/icc/dtp027 Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32(5), 590-607. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/journal/mnsc Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2008). Organizing for higher reliability: Lessons learned from wildland firefighters. Fire Management Today, 68(2), 14-16. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/fmt/ Weick, K., Sutcliffe, K., & Obstfeld, D. (2000). High reliability: The power of mindfulness. Leader to Leader, 2(17), 33-38. Retrieved from http://www.leadertoleaderjournal.com/ Windrum, P., Schartinger, D., Rubalcaba, L., Gallouj, F., & Toivonen, M. (2016). The cocreation of multi-agent social innovations: A bridge between service and social innovation research. European Journal of Innovation Management, 19(2), 150-166. doi:10.1108/EJIM-05-2015-0033
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
41
Wolever, R. Q., Bobinet, K. J., McCabe, K., Mackenzie, E. R., Fekete, E., Kusnick, C. A., & Baime, M. (2012). Effective and viable mind-body stress reduction in the workplace: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(2), 246-258. doi:10.1037/a0027278 Yayavaram, S. )., & Chen, W. ). (2015). Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity. Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 377-396. doi:10.1002/smj.2218 Zhao, Y. (2014). Interpreting innovation dynamics with complexity theory. International Journal of Innovation And Technology Management, 11(5), doi:10.1142/S0219877014500357 Zurub, H., Ionescu, A. C., & Bob, N. (2015). The integration system innovation and adaptation in business complexity: Empirical evidence from Romania. International Journal of Economic Practices & Theories, 5(5), 590-595. Retrieved from http://www.ijept.org/index.php/ijept%20
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
42
Appendix A
Figure 3. Quantum model Innovations in physics provide models that might transfer sense through metaphor and analogy to advance knowledge in the behavioral sciences. For instance, application of complexity theory to the innovation literature and across the behavioral sciences is beginning to do so successfully by providing innovative management practices to better address increasing complexity. How might a quantum model enhance application of diffusion of innovations theory, complexity theory, and mindfulness applications in the innovation literature? What might it mean for management? First, quantum theory might better explain phenomenon occurring in the knowledge production and diffusion industry (research and publication). For instance, why might a concept receive increasing attention at one point in time, virtually disappear from the scene, then reappear in varying intensities over time; this is measurable by density of publications or citation
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
43
histories for a given timeframe. Further, mindful practice as a perceptual enhancement seems best defined by an objective awareness of system processes from multiple perspectives. Indeed, depending on the perspective, the mindful practitioner might not only be observing the same phenomena differently but might actually impact which 'version' of the phenomena she observes and in that way alter it by virtue of perceiving it. It is not implausible to formulate DIT, CAS, and quantum theory in evolutionary terms where linearity, begets non-linearity, begets the absence of linear concepts in favor of relativity. The latter might have sway on current conceptualizations of change. The Hawthorn effect shows how the presence of an observer can alter the behavior of those observed, but how might the observer and the observed together become a wholly separate agent with a perspective different from its parts? In quantum terms, these perspectives don't actually refer to a world as something constructed by shared perceptions. There is no world beyond first-person perspective. Further, time as change is relative to fixed points in space that also change with relative perspective. How might mindfulness be described in terms of relativity operationalized as a perceptual enhancement allowing managers to conceive of time and perceive change in new ways? Recent work by a cognitive scientist at UC Irvine has allowed new epistemological positions to emerge. 'Conscious realism' suggests objective reality is conscious agents or perspectives strung together in arbitrarily complex ways but nothing more than first-person points of view (Hoffman, 2016). This thought reflects quantum mechanical mathematical anomalies suggesting there are no objects to exist, just mental representations, which is why apparent objects can 'pop into existence' as we observe them. So, the phrase 'we construct the world socially' is nonsensical because 'world' is presupposed erroneously. Consequently, when
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
44
science is presented as a method for getting as close to reality - or the 'true' objects we describe as possible, it's impossible because we cannot agree upon some 'thing' with someone we only imagine. We aren't getting closer to truth, we are agents acting according to 'fitness.'
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
45
Appendix B
The second search for 'innovation AND mindfulness' using the same parameters yielded 2,063 results. After limiting for scholarly (peer-reviewed) journals, in English, the search yielded 130 results. All articles were scanned for relevance by reading abstracts and scanning full articles which reduced the number to 30 articles. The remaining 30 articles were subject to WoE quality assessments, leaving 10 total articles from the search. Additionally, Smartsearch was run on the most relevant article. Combined with snowballing methods, the search yielded an additional 2 articles making the total 12.
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
46
Appendix C WoE Quality Measures - P1 Study
Soundness
Appropriateness
Relevance
Overall
Allen
Medium
Low
Medium
5
Baert
Low
Medium
Medium
5
Bressers
Medium
Medium
Medium
6
Brown
NA
Chong
NA
Fontana
Low
Low
Medium
4
Geer
Low
Low
Medium
4
Heidenreich
High
High
Medium
8
Huang
Medium
Medium
Medium
6
Ivanova
High
Medium
High
8
Jalonen
Medium
Low
High
6
Jorg
NA
Katz
Medium
High
High
Kumari
High
Medium
Low/Medium 6.5
Laland
8
NA
Mastrogeorgio High
High
Medium
8
Matei
Medium
Low
High
6
Matthews
High
High
High
NA
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
47
Mendes
Low
Low
High
5
Nan
High
Medium
High
8
Nesvetailova
Low
Medium
Medium
5
Palmberg
High
High
High
9
Palmie
High
High
Low
7
Pelc
Medium
Medium
Medium
6
Rahmandad
High
High
Low
7
Rowe
High
Medium
High
8
Serrano
Low
Medium
Medium
5
Taylor
NA
Torugsa
High
Medium
Medium
7
Windrum
High
High
Low
7
Yayavaram
High
High
Medium
8
Zhao
High
High
Medium
8
Zubielqui
High
High
Medium
8
Zurub
Low/Medium
Medium
Low/Medium 5
Low = 1 Medium = 2 High = 3 WoE - P1 Final Study
Soundness
Appropriateness
Relevance
Overall
Heidenreich
High
High
Medium
8
Ivanova
High
Medium
High
8
Katz
Medium
High
High
8
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
48
Mastrogeorgio High
High
Medium
8
Palmberg
High
High
High
9
Rowe
High
Medium
High
8
Torugsa
High
Medium
Medium
7
Yayavaram
High
High
Medium
8
Zubielqui
High
High
Medium
8
WoE Quality Measures - P2 Study
Soundness
Appropriateness
Relevance Overall
Ames
Low
Medium
High
6
Anderson
Medium
Low
Medium
5
Barnart Byrne
NA Medium
Low
Medium
Capel
5 NA
Charoensukmongkol High
High
High
9
Chesley
NA
Dobson
NA
Gotinck
Medium
Medium
Low
5
Hall
Low
Low
High
5
Hyland
Medium
Medium
High
7
Jennings
Low
Low
High
5
Mu
High
Medium
High
8
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
49
Ness
NA
Raney
High
High
High
9
Ray
High
Medium
Medium
7
Schutze
Medium
Low
Medium
5
Shirey
Low
Low
Medium
5
Siqueira
Medium
Medium
Medium
6
Solloway
Medium
Medium
High
7
Sorrell
NA
Sun
High
High
High
9
Surrendra
High
High
Medium
8
Swanson
High
Medium
High
8
Tanay
Medium
High
Medium
7
Valorinta
Medium
Medium
Medium
6
Wolever
High
High
High
9
Low = 1 Medium = 2 High = 3; NA = not available WoE P2 Final Study
Soundness
Appropriateness
Relevance Overall
Raney
High
High
High
9
Wolever
High
High
High
9
Hyland
Medium
Medium
High
7
Solloway
Medium
Medium
High
7
Swanson
High
Medium
High
8
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
50
Ray
High
Medium
Medium
7
Tanay
Medium
High
Medium
7
Mu
High
Medium
High
8
High
High
9
Charoensukmongkol High
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
51
Appendix D
Identification
PRISMA Flow Diagram
Records identified through database searching (n = 144,297 )
Additional records identified through other sources (n = 2 )
Screening
Records after duplicates removed (n = 144,299 )
Records screened (n = 190 )
Records excluded (n =190 )
Included
Eligibility
Full-text articles assessed for eligibility (n = 125) Full-text articles excluded (n =90) Studies included in qualitative synthesis (n = 5 )
Studies included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) (n = 5)
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
52
Appendix D
Identification
PRISMA Flow Diagram
Records identified through database searching (n = 2,063 )
Additional records identified through other sources (n = 2 )
Screening
Records after duplicates removed (n = 2,065 )
Records screened (n = 130 )
Records excluded (n =100 )
Included
Eligibility
Full-text articles assessed for eligibility (n = 30) Full-text articles excluded (n =20) Studies included in qualitative synthesis (n = 5 )
Studies included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) (n = 5)
DIFFUSING MINDFULNESS
53
