Mindful unlearning in unprecedented times: Implications for management and organizations

Crises trigger both learning and unlearning at both intra-organizational and inter-organizational levels. This article stresses the need to facilitate unlearning for effective crisis management and shows how we could use mindfulness practice to enhance unlearning and transformative learning in a crisis. This study proposes the conceptualization of mindful unlearning in crisis with different mechanisms to foster unlearning in three stages of crisis (pre-crisis, during-crisis, and post-crisis). These mechanisms include mindful awareness of impermanence and sensual processing (pre-crisis stage), mindful awareness of interdependence and right intention (crisis management stage), and mindful awareness of transiency and past experiences (post-crisis stage).

Strategies and challenges for the promotion of a responsibility mindset in technical career students during internships

Promoting responsibility values and knowledge of students requires actions with a strong focus on citizenship and ethics, with the aim to commit, engage, and empower future professionals. In this sense, a key question arises: how to define and foster responsibility among professionals at different organizational levels? This paper deals with contextual factors and key concepts for promoting responsibility-related values and competences (knowledge, skills, attitudes) throughout curricular internships carried out by students of technical degrees. In this work, we explore the advantages and challenges of working on a responsibility approach at this stage of a professional career, and we outline ideas for optimizing the process.

Response—Corruption, Trust, and Professional Regulation

In their 2018 article in the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Little, Lipworth, and Kerridge unpack the concept of corruption and clarify the mechanisms that foster corruption and allow it to persist, noting that organizations are “corruptogenic.” To address the “so-what” question, I draw on research about trust and trustworthiness, emphasizing that a person’s well-being and sense of security require trust to be present at both the individual and organizational levels—which is not possible in an environment where corruption and misconduct prevail. I highlight similarities in Little et al.’s framing of corruption to the persistent problem of scientific misconduct in research and publishing. I acknowledge the challenges in stemming corruption in science and medicine and conclude with a discussion about the need to reinvigorate a web of stakeholders to actively engage in professional regulation.

Content Analysis of Gossip at Different Levels of a Hospital

Background: Most societies have a negative attitude toward gossip and managers are concerned about the impact of gossips on the communication in an organizational environment. Our study examined the perception of gossip, and the context of gossip at different levels of a hospital, a case of organization with high communicational relation among staff. Also, the differences between the gossip context within the organizational context and within the social environment have been considered. Methodology: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 informants, 9 in each of three groups: nurses, supervisors and managers of the Hospital. Recorded interviews were analyzed using content analysis, and results for each group of respondents were compared. Finally, the main gossiping issues for each group were categorized. Results: The study revealed that the topics of gossip in a hospital can be divided into eight main categories, and 34 sub-categories all identifiable by special topics. These main topics included confidentiality issues, merits, financial status/standing, personal characteristics, position, communications, biography, and job conditions. In terms of organizational gossip, a person’s merit in the workplace and financial standing were of particular interest to the participants of this study. Also, the gossip topics at different levels among nurses, administrators, and managers had significant differences. Conclusion: Managers should acknowledge different gossip contents among people at different organizational levels, and that employees do not have the same motives for communication at different organizational levels. Additionally, the distances between contents in the Tendency to Gossip Questionnaire and categories in the organizational environment need more studies, to explore precedents and outputs. Managers may use these findings to facilitate organizational change and communication.

Mapping Innovation Research in Organizations: A Bibliometric Analysis

This essay conducts a bibliometric study on innovation research in organizations within the three levels (i.e., individual, work team, and organizational) by using CiteSpace software to analyze 6,354 academic articles from the year 2000 to 2020 in four aspects: temporal distribution of published papers, scientific community (countries/regions/cited authors), intellectual structure (cited journals/cited references), and research hotspots. The research findings show that the total number and the growth rate of publications at the organizational level are far higher than the other two levels (individual and work team). The top three countries with the number of publications are United States, China, and United Kingdom. The top five highly cited authors are identified and listed from individual, work team, and organizational levels. Academy of Management Journal and Academy of Management Review are the top two highly cited journals at all three levels (i.e., individual, work team, and organizational levels). The most highly cited articles at the three levels are about topics of linking empowering leadership and employee creativity, team-level predictors of innovation at work, and organizational ambidexterity. The top three research hotspots are identified and listed from individual, work team, and organizational levels. These findings provide snapshots and comparisons of innovation research in management within the three levels (i.e., individual, work team, and organizational levels), which might be beneficial for researchers and scholars to understand and explore innovative behavior in organizations from a multilevel perspective.

A Study of the Perception of Indian Employees on Organizational Structure

This paper examines the perception of Indian employees on the role of organizational structure; it also aims to assess the impact of culture on the views of Indian employees regarding their choice of work environment and the feasibility of self-management practices in India. Despite widespread acknowledgment of the challenges presented by flat structures and hierarchical structures, little is known about today's Indian workforce's think and needs. The relationships between various factors on the employees’ orientation of the preferred organizational structure and its effect on their motivation are studied in this paper. The results reveal no great disparity in the views and choices of the employees who have an experience of flat structure and those who do not. However, it does indicate various other relationships between the factors that impact the organizational structure like Control and Capability, Reward-Systems and Organizational Levels, Culture and Reward Systems, Tendency to Explore and Reward Systems, Organizational levels and Motivation and lastly, Organizational Level and Culture. The results also suggest that Indian employees do want to have autonomy and responsibility in their work. However, they do believe that the different organizational levels have their role in managing the organization.

Misfit? The Use of Metrics in Innovation

Measuring innovation is a challenging but essential task to improve business performance. To tackle this task, key performance indicators (KPIs) can be used to measure and monitor innovation. The objective of this study is to explore how KPIs, designed for measuring innovation, are used in practice. To achieve this objective, the author draws upon literature on business performance in accounting and innovation, yet moves away from the functional view. Instead, the author focuses explicitly on how organizational members, through their use of KPIs in innovation, make sense of conflicting interpretations and integrate them into their practices. A qualitative in-depth case study was conducted at the innovation department of an organization in the process industry that operates production sites and sales organizations worldwide. In total, 28 interviews and complementary observations were undertaken at several organizational levels (multi-level). The empirical evidence suggests that strategic change, attributed to commoditization, affects the predetermined KPIs in use. Notably, these KPIs in innovation are used, despite their poor fit to innovation subject to commoditization. From a relational perspective, this study indicates that in innovation, KPIs are usually complemented by or supplemented with other information, as stand-alone KPIs exhibit a significant degree of incompleteness. In contrast to conventional studies in innovation and management accounting, this study explores the use of key performance indicators (KPIs) in innovation from an interpretative perspective. This perspective advances our understanding of the actual use of KPIs and uncovers the complexity of accounting and innovation, which involve numerous angles and organizational levels. Practically, the findings of this study will inform managers in innovation about the use of KPIs in innovation and the challenges individual organizational members face when using them. In innovation, KPIs appear to be subjective and used in unintended ways. Thus, understanding how KPIs are used in innovation is a game of reading between the lines, and these KPIs can be regarded as misfits.