top of page
OSOD for Black Background_edited.png
Habituating Symbol 2_edited_edited.jpg


Getting Started!

Congratulations on taking the Headspace assessment! This report is a doorway into understanding the headspace you’ve been experiencing recently. It’s important to remember that these headspaces are not permanent states but rather dispositions we find ourselves in from time to time due to our experiences and contexts. In other words, a headspace is not like a personality type that is difficult to change, but instead it is fluid and (as you'll see) well worth regularly paying attention to.


All of us have likely experienced all four of the headspaces described below. For instance, there is nothing more human than getting caught up in the everyday cares of work and wondering whether we've made a dent in our to-do list as is the case with Habituating. Similarly, all of us have longed for greater meaning in what we do from time to time, as is the case with Yearning. Sometimes we experience periods of feeling great connection to the present moment, and the ability to challenge assumptions about what we all take for granted, as is the case with Transforming.  And still it is possible to experience deep sense of centeredness, wisdom, and connection with others as is the case with Transcending.

Whatever the case may be, many of us experience sustained periods in a given headspace until something significant triggers a change. So, while it might feel like you’re stuck in a particular headspace, change is always right around the corner, and this report provides some great ways to intentionally expand your headspace.

Understanding your recent headspace can have profound effects on how you are seen, understood, and even misunderstood by colleagues. It impacts your relationships, strategy, problem-solving abilities, team cohesion, and overall performance. By delving into this report, you’ll gain insights into the headspace you’re currently in, helping you to recognize patterns, strengths, and areas for growth. This self-awareness can lead to enhanced interactions, better decision-making, and a more fulfilling professional life.

As you read through the content, we encourage you to approach it with an open mind and a sense of curiosity. Reflect on what resonates with your experiences and observations. Trust your intuition to discern truths that perhaps you’ve never fully reflected upon before. Pay special attention to elements that spark a sense of wonder and excitement. This mindful reading can help you know yourself more deeply and elevate your experience and impact at work. Embrace this opportunity for growth and self-discovery. This report pairs especially well with the "Use of Self" GPT, an app trained to help leaders deepen self-awareness and apply their core values in service of positive change (free with Chat GPT subscription).

Use of Self Symbol 2.png

What is Headspace?

Headspace is a dynamic concept that integrates two key aspects of conscious life that greatly influence our well-being and the prosperity of teams and organizations we are part of. 


Presence refers to our level of mindfulness, the degree to which we are intentionally aware of practicing awareness of our thoughts, emotions, and surroundings in the present moment and without judgment.


The degree to which we are mindful can vary in intensity and can be seen as a state or a trait. People who are more mindful show greater self-control and can respond thoughtfully rather than react impulsively to negative situations. Mindfulness also reduces ego-driven behaviors, which often harm others, and fosters a sense of oneness with others.

On the other hand, absentmindedness or mindlessness occurs when there is a lack of this balanced awareness, leading to less self-control and more self-centered actions. Cultivating mindfulness helps individuals achieve a deeper, more connected way of experiencing the world.


Purpose, on the other hand, is the type of meaning we assign to our work, the overarching sense of direction and significance we perceive in our professional endeavors. 

The great existential psychologist, Irvin Yalom (2008) explains that people usually live in two different ways. The first way, which entails "Everyday purpose," involves focusing on things like appearance, independence, possessions, and status. This is the main focus of many self-help books. However, the downside of this way of living includes getting distracted by the need to stand out , win workplace conflicts, and engage with gossip, for instance. 

The second way of living, which Yalom calls "Ontological purpose," is about having a deeper and more profound  sense of being. Instead of worrying about how things are, it means being amazed that things exist at all. Living in this mode involves being aware of your existence, its fragility, and your responsibility for it. This way of living emphasizes genuine self-expression, deeper meaning, personal fulfillment, and humanity.

Purpose new.png

Aligning Presence with Purpose

At any moment, varying degrees of Presence and Purpose can give rise to four distinct headspaces, periodic dispositions that influence our curiosity, which in turn shape our questions and ability to engage with and navigate our changing environment. As you can imagine this is particularly important for professionals who help others facilitate and manage change, such as OD practitioners, HR Business Partners, and many other forms of leadership.


The 4 Headspaces

Yearning Symbol 1.png


Characterized by high purpose but low mindfulness, individuals in this headspace restlessly and intermittently seek deeper meaning behind problems, conflict, and personal identity. Marked by Transient Curiosity, those in the Yearning headspace ask fleeting, peppered questions from the heart that lack sustained focus. Individuals with transient curiosity often find themselves pulled in multiple directions, searching for insights to quell their existential unrest. This type of curiosity can lead to scattered efforts and a tendency to miss obvious insights because the focus is constantly shifting. 

Habituating Symbol 1.png


Operating from an everyday sense of purpose, this headspace is less mindful of the present moment and finds greater meaning in productivity and task achievement. Habituating individuals may sometimes adhere rigidly to routines and exhibit an aversion to change, often overlooking deeper meanings and broader implications of their work. This headspace is marked by Routine Curiosity, which favors the familiar and predictable (If... then...). Individuals in this state tend to focus on maintaining consistency and reliability.

Transforming Symbol 1.png


With high mindfulness and everyday purpose, those in this headspace are open to change and continuously learning. They challenge and transform strategic and relational patterns, seeking to integrate new information and experiences to improve organizational effectiveness and personal achievement. This headspace embodies Adaptive Curiosity, where individuals are flexible in their thinking and eager to learn from diverse sources (As if...). They ask probing questions that drive continuous improvement and innovation.

Transcending Symbol 1.png


Marked by high mindfulness and a deep sense of purpose, individuals in this headspace feel a profound connection to others and a commitment to higher values. They see organizational strategy as a means to enhance social responsibility and well-being, fostering a sense of compassion and joy in their work. This headspace is driven by Integrative Curiosity, where individuals synthesize diverse perspectives to create holistic and innovative solutions (What if...). They seek to understand the interconnectedness of various factors and aim to foster inclusivity and holistic thinking.

How "Transcending" am I? 

The blue dots on this graph indicate Headspace scores for all participants and updates automatically, whenever a new person submits their assessment.  To determine how Transcending you've been lately, just approximate where your Presence and Purpose scores intersect. You can find your scores in the email you received after taking this assessment.


Approximate your Purpose score along the X axis (the horizontal line), and then see where that intersects with your Presence score along the Y axis (vertical line). For instance if both your Presence and Purpose score were 55, your dot would be located in the center of the graph. If your Headspace (dot) falls on a line, that simply means you are somewhere between headspaces.

Are Presence & Purpose Related?
Presence and Purpose are both ubiquitous aspects of conscious life, yet our research demonstrates that they are distinct concepts. So it's worth asking, if one is more present, do they become more purposeful (and vice versa). The dotted grey line (-----) in this graph represents a potential trend, in this relationship. As we continue to receive submissions we should begin to see whether a clear trend emerges. What do you think? 


Why Headspace Matters

Modern organizational effectiveness hinges on the development of employees who can adeptly navigate Adaptive Challenges (see the work of Heifetz, 2009), which are often complex and systemic in nature. Adaptive challenges include things like AI Integration, Employee Experience (EX) Design, Boundaryless HR, and Global Talent Management. What often gets leaders and teams "stuck" is when they apply a technical paradigm to these adaptive challenges. Technical challenges, such as compensation structures, payroll analysis, and labor law compliance, are clear and targeted subjects with established solutions that rely on expertise and familiar roles. However, adaptive challenges demand a headspace that gives rise to genuinely innovative and considerate lines of inquiry. The key to successfully addressing these adaptive challenges lies in cultivating a headspace that encourages wise and provocative questioning. This headspace, both individually and within teams, is shaped by Presence and Purpose.

Static Curiosity

Neuroscience research underscores that headspaces dominated by attachment to ego and expertise—characterized by Yearning and Habituating—constrain innovation to Static Curiosity, which is routine and transient, leading to a sense of stagnation among leaders and teams. When individuals and teams operate from a headspace where ego and expertise are at the forefront, they tend to rely on taken-for-granted lines of inquiry. This often stems from a need to affirm their existing knowledge and expertise, leading to questions and approaches that are predictable and safe. Such an approach, while comfortable, inherently limits perspective and creativity because it confines thinking to familiar territories and resists venturing into uncharted domains.

Static Brain.png
Static Curiosity 2.png

This reliance on familiar methods not only resists change but also stifles innovation and the generation of new ideas. Teams and leaders who prefer sticking to what they know miss out on opportunities to explore novel solutions and approaches that could potentially transform their organizations. The resistance to change creates an environment where new and potentially groundbreaking ideas are dismissed or not even considered. This results in a growing sense of frustration and a feeling of being stuck, as efforts do not lead to meaningful progress or improvements.

Static Curiosity.png

Like trying to jam two jigsaw puzzle pieces together that don't quite fit, overreliance on static curiosity forces alignment between efforts and existing organizational goals without questioning their relevance, impact on employee well-being, or effectiveness. This rigid alignment can lead to a misalignment with the dynamic nature of external environments and internal needs, further exacerbating the sense of being stuck. Teams feel as if their efforts are in vain because they are bound by outdated frameworks and objectives that no longer serve the organization’s best interests. Consequently, innovation is not just stifled but practically halted, preventing the organization from evolving and adapting to new challenges and opportunities.

Dynamic Curiosity

Conversely, headspaces that are selfless and open-minded—embodied by Transforming and Transcending—promote Dynamic Curiosity. When we let go of ego and expertise, we invite flexible thinking that embraces diverse perspectives. This openness fosters psychological safety, as the threat to ego is minimized, allowing team members to share ideas without fear of judgment. Such an environment encourages forms of inquiry that are exploratory and innovative, breaking free from the constraints of conventional thinking.

Dynamic Brain.png
Dynamic Curiosity 2.png

This selfless approach to headspace challenges existing assumptions and encourages continuous leadership development. Leaders who practice dynamic curiosity are more likely to question the status quo and explore new strategies that align culture with organizational goals. This alignment is crucial for creating a cohesive and forward-thinking organizational strategy. By fostering a headspace where dynamic curiosity thrives, organizations can drive their strategy and culture forward in meaningful and measurable ways.

Dynamic Curiosity.png

It is imperative for leaders and consultants in successful organizations to take headspace seriously, fostering environments where employees feel engaged, healthily challenged, and fulfilled. By cultivating a headspace that values flexible thinking, reduces ego threats, and challenges assumptions, organizations can develop a culture of dynamic curiosity that leads to innovative solutions and sustainable growth.

Yin & Yang of Headspace

Each headspace presents its own set of upsides and challenges. For instance, individuals in the Yearning headspace bring enthusiasm and fresh perspectives but may struggle with focus and direction. Those in the Habituating headspace ensure stability and consistency but might overlook or resist necessary changes and innovation. The Transforming headspace encourages continuous improvement and adaptability, though it can sometimes disrupt existing processes and norms and overlook deeper existential considerations. Lastly, individuals in the Transcending headspace inspire deep connections and ethical behavior, but they might face challenges in aligning their high ideals with everyday organizational realities.


As your read through this report, be careful not to dwell on the challenges but instead,  note how you can leverage existing tools from the fields of leadership development, team development, and organization development to create a more innovative and inclusive headspace for yourself (and those around you!). By doing so, we can all impact prosperity across and beyond our organizations.


A Habituating way of being sits at the intersection of being less mindful and more concerned with everyday matters. As a result, this headspace gets easily swept up in the work of the day, focusing efforts mainly on a to-do list or performance objectives. Without "stopping to smell the roses" people in this headspace may also exhibit an aversion to creativity. Since this headspace is less aware of the present moment than others, individuals may overlook many of the problematic assumptions and rules they presuppose, making it very difficult to address unconscious biases. Anxiety likely prevails around productivity, gain, and loss.

The repetitive nature of habituation perpetuates one’s professional identity. In the words of Tarde (1903), this may include “an unconscious imitation of self by self,” a habit he deemed “self-imitation” (p. 75). As habits become part of one’s identity, argues Lumsden (2013), they want to repeat themselves and are difficult to dislodge, making agency challenging to ignite. For individuals who repeatedly find themselves in the habituating headspace, mindfulness practice should be a leadership development priority because one must first learn to observe their assumptions before genuinely challenging them and recognizing alternatives before adopting new behaviors.

Routine Curiosity

Individuals with a habituating headspace prefer stability and consistency, often leading to resistance to change and new ideas. This type of curiosity is driven by a desire for predictability and reliability, ensuring consistency and reliability in processes but potentially hindering innovation. Employees with routine curiosity tend to follow established procedures and protocols, showing reluctance to adopt new technologies or methods. For instance, a worker might prefer using traditional software over learning a new, more efficient program. They often prefer tasks that are predictable and well-defined, such as a project manager who adheres rigidly to standard procedures despite new, potentially better alternatives.

If... then...

Self Curiosity

  1. Why do I often feel like I'm just going through the motions at work?

  2. How can I stick to tried-and-true methods without feeling pressured to innovate?

  3. Why do I feel anxious about changes and new initiatives in our team?

  4. How can I ensure my team sees the value in our established processes?

  5. Why do I sometimes struggle to see the bigger picture beyond our daily tasks?

Team Curiosity

  1. Do you feel our established procedures are effective, or do you think we should explore new methods?

  2. How do you stay motivated when our tasks seem repetitive?

  3. What helps you maintain focus on our routine processes?

  4. Do you think our team benefits from sticking to proven strategies, or should we consider new approaches?

  5. How do you handle changes in our workflows or processes?

Organizational Curiosity

  1. How can we balance the need for stability with the demands for innovation?

  2. What steps can we take to maintain our current processes while adapting to new challenges?

  3. How can I contribute to improving our team’s efficiency without disrupting our routines?

  4. Sometimes I feel resistant to change – how can I better support new initiatives?

  5. How do we ensure our strategic goals align with our established processes and daily operations?

Collective Habituating

Understanding headspace is not just about individual experiences but also about how these experiences manifest at the team and organizational levels. Collective experiences such as change fatigue, leadership mistrust, rapid expansion, or restructuring can significantly impact collective headspace. For instance, a team might collectively feel a sense of stagnation due to reliance on routine, leading to a shared headspace of resistance to change. Similarly, an organization with a long history of established procedures may collectively strive for stability and predictability, impacting its adaptability and innovation potential.

Developing Headspace

This section provides specific tools and frameworks for cultivating a more mindful and meaningful headspace for those whose disposition is Habituating at the individual, team, and organizational level. This includes a summary of the most common challenges faced by individuals, teams, and organizations in this headspace, as well as specific tools and frameworks capable of shifting  into a more healthy and productive way of working together.

Moving from Habituating to Transforming or Transcending are both important options and this depends greatly on the individual, the context, and strategy of the organization and team they are part of.

Habituating 2.png

Individual Development

Individuals in the Habituating headspace often exhibit a need for change acceptance, as they may resist new methods and technologies, sticking to familiar routines. The Four Columns Exercise by Kegan and Lahey is a tool designed to identify and challenge underlying assumptions that prevent change. This exercise helps individuals recognize and question their assumptions, promoting openness to new methods and behaviors, thereby easing the acceptance of change.

Anxiety about material gain and loss is common in the Habituating headspace, where there is a strong focus on maintaining the current status and avoiding risks. Motivational Interviewing is a method that helps individuals resolve ambivalent feelings and insecurities. It supports individuals in overcoming anxiety about change by focusing on personal motivations and goals, reducing their fears and enhancing their readiness for new experiences.

Feeling disconnected from broader goals is another challenge for those in the Habituating headspace, as they often struggle to see the bigger picture beyond daily tasks. The Eisenhower Box, a time management tool that helps prioritize tasks based on urgency and importance, addresses this issue. By helping individuals focus on what truly matters, the Eisenhower Box connects daily tasks to broader organizational goals, fostering a sense of purpose and alignment.

Resistance to reflective practices is prevalent among individuals in the Habituating headspace, making it difficult for them to adopt new behaviors and challenge assumptions. The 4 Disciplines of Execution (4DX) is a framework for setting and achieving wildly important goals through disciplined execution. This framework encourages mindful self-observation and disciplined action towards critical goals, promoting awareness and change by integrating structured reflection and actionable steps.


Lastly, individuals with routine curiosity in the Habituating headspace prefer stability and predictability, often showing reluctance to adopt new technologies or methods. Kolb's Learning Style Inventory assesses individual learning preferences to tailor development approaches. By aligning learning and development strategies with individual preferences, this tool helps individuals adapt to new methods while maintaining confidence, ensuring that development is both effective and comfortable.

Team Development

Teams in the Habituating headspace often face the need for change acceptance, as they may resist new strategies, preferring familiar routines. The Ladder of Inference is a valuable tool to help teams reflect on and question their own thinking process. By encouraging reflection, this tool helps teams become more open to change by making their thought processes explicit and subject to scrutiny.

Anxiety about material gain and loss is another challenge for teams in the Habituating headspace, as there is a strong focus on maintaining the current status and avoiding risks. The Johari Window is a technique that helps team members better understand themselves and others. By building trust, it encourages openness and feedback within the team, reducing anxiety and fostering a more supportive environment.

Feeling disconnected from broader goals can be a significant issue for teams in the Habituating headspace, as they may struggle to see the bigger picture beyond daily tasks. The GE Change Acceleration Process (CAP) is a framework that accelerates change by addressing both the technical and cultural aspects. By integrating technical and cultural change, CAP helps teams understand and align with broader organizational goals, ensuring a holistic approach to change.

Resistance to reflective practices is prevalent among teams in the Habituating headspace, making it difficult for them to adopt new behaviors and challenge assumptions. Collaborative Inquiry is an approach that involves team members working together to reflect on and investigate their practices. This method promotes shared reflection and learning, fostering a culture of collective inquiry and continuous improvement within the team.


Lastly, teams with routine curiosity in the Habituating headspace prefer stability and predictability, often showing reluctance to adopt new technologies or methods. Implementing Agile Teams methodologies fosters flexibility and responsiveness. By encouraging adaptability and innovation while maintaining clear roles and responsibilities, Agile Teams help organizations stay competitive and effective in a constantly changing environment.

Organization Development

Organizations in the Habituating headspace often face the need for change acceptance, struggling with strategic alignment and resisting new initiatives. Double Loop Learning is a framework that encourages questioning underlying assumptions and beliefs, helping organizations manage resistance and align with new initiatives effectively by challenging these fundamental assumptions. This approach ensures that organizations can adapt to new strategies by aligning their deeper beliefs with their actions.

Anxiety about material gain and loss is prevalent in organizational cultures focused on maintaining the current status and avoiding risks. Transformational Leadership Training develops leadership qualities that inspire and guide the organization through change. By building confidence and vision, this training reduces organizational self-doubt and helps leaders navigate the uncertainties of change, fostering a more dynamic and resilient organizational culture.

Feeling disconnected from broader goals is a common issue, as organizations may struggle to see the bigger picture beyond daily tasks. Participative Design engages employees in the design of their work processes to align with strategic goals. This inclusive strategy development ensures that employees at all levels understand and contribute to strategic goals, fostering alignment and engagement throughout the organization. By involving employees in strategic planning, Participative Design helps bridge the gap between daily operations and long-term objectives.

Resistance to reflective practices is another challenge, making it difficult for organizations to adopt new behaviors and challenge assumptions. Narrative Inquiry is a method of gathering and interpreting the stories and experiences of individuals within the organization. By promoting a culture of reflection and continuous improvement, Narrative Inquiry encourages the sharing and analysis of personal and organizational narratives. This approach helps organizations learn from their experiences and continuously evolve.

Lastly, organizations with routine curiosity often prefer stability and predictability, showing reluctance to adopt new technologies or methods. Future Search, a participative planning method, brings stakeholders together to envision a desirable future. This future-oriented planning helps organizations connect current routines with long-term strategic goals, fostering alignment and engagement. By involving diverse stakeholders in envisioning the future, Future Search ensures that organizational strategies are both inclusive and forward-thinking.

The "Business Case"

Addressing a transcending headspace involves investing in tools and frameworks that enhance practical wisdom, knowledge sharing, and organizational storytelling while fostering a culture of continuous learning and mindfulness. Demonstrating the tangible benefits of these outcomes for individuals, teams, and organizations is essential to championing and improving developmental activities and targeting your leadership and organization development budget more effectively. This section provides a brief overview of Return on Investment (ROI), as well as the specific types of ROI that are logically candidates for addressing the transcending headspace, a review of how to calculate these types of ROI, and some illustrative examples.

Return on Headspace (ROH)

Return on Investment (ROI) is a performance measure used to evaluate the efficiency or profitability of an investment. It calculates the return of an investment relative to its cost. ROI is crucial in justifying the expenditure on development initiatives, as it demonstrates their value in terms of improved performance, reduced costs, and increased revenue. For initiatives aimed at developing headspace, several specific "Return on Headspace" (ROH) targets are particularly relevant.

Employee Engagement and Satisfaction: Improving employee engagement and satisfaction is critical for organizations. Employee engagement refers to the emotional commitment an employee has to their organization and its goals, often leading to higher productivity and lower turnover rates. Job satisfaction measures how content an employee is with their job. A meta-analysis of 44 empirical studies demonstrated a significant positive relationship between meaningful work and engagement, commitment, and job satisfaction, as well as life satisfaction, life meaning, and general health (Allan et al., 2019). Authentic leaders who align presence and purpose see a decrease in turnover intention in their employees (Azanza et al., 2015). Greater meaning also has a significant positive impact on employee satisfaction (Dehler & Welsh, 1994). An organization that successfully improves its Employee Net Promoter Score (eNPS) – a metric that measures the likelihood of employees to recommend their workplace to others – can see a direct correlation to increased productivity and reduced turnover costs.

Employee Value Proposition (EVP): Organizations whose employees lack a deeper sense of meaning at work experience dramatically increased rates of turnover (Dhingra et al., 2020; Fosslien, 2021; Kumar, 2021; Stier & Driggs, 2021; Valini et al., 2019). Organizations that proactively seek and develop employees whose sense of purpose aligns with the mission offer a compelling Employee Value Proposition (EVP). EVP refers to the unique set of benefits that an employee receives in return for their skills, capabilities, and experience. Organizations with wise leaders and meaningful work attract and retain top talent. For example, improved EVP can lead to higher retention rates and reduced recruitment costs.

Efficiency and Task Completion: A large body of research demonstrates that leaders who authentically express aa greater sense of purpose observe a significant increase in employee performance (Azanza et al., 2015; Nasab et al., 2019; Ribeiro et al., 2018a, 2018b). Employees who connect with a greater sense of purpose at work also experience a measurable increase in productivity and performance (Karakas, 2010; Paloutzian et al., 2003; Reave, 2005). Efficiency and task completion rates are essential indicators of an organization's operational health. 

Innovation and Creativity: Research demonstrates that greater presence at work leads to increased creativity (Brendel et al., 2016; Colzato et al., 2012; Horan, 2009; Langer, 2007). Measuring the number of new initiatives successfully completed and the time taken from idea to implementation can provide clear indicators of the ROH of these interventions. For example, reducing the average time from idea to market by 20 days can significantly boost revenue.


Well-Being and Stress Reduction: Well-being and stress reduction are crucial for maintaining a healthy, productive workforce. Increased mindfulness at work leads to significantly improved employee well-being (Hanley et al., 2017). It should come as no surprise that well-being and performance both experience a dramatic increase when presence is increased at work (Anderson et al., 2007; Glomb et al., 2011; Good et al., 2016; Hülsheger et al., 2013; Kudesia, 2019; Li et al., 2016; Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2017). Organizations whose employees are experiencing change fatigue can also benefit from significant decreases in anxiety through increased mindfulness (Davidson et al., 2003; Gross et al., 2004; Ramel et al., 2004; Sagula and Rice, 2004; Shapiro et al., 2007; Tacon et al., 2003, 2004; Vieten and Astin, 2008). Tools such as the Search Inside Yourself program and mindfulness practice can lead to substantial improvements in mental health and stress levels. Lower stress levels can reduce sick days and improve overall productivity. 

Collaboration and Team Cohesion: Research demonstrates that increased presence leads to prosocial behaviors (Chen & Jordan, 2018; Johnson, 2007; Prakash et al., 2020; Shapiro et al., 2006; Shapiro et al., 2012). Collaboration and team cohesion are essential for effective teamwork and project success.  Improved team satisfaction and reduced turnover rates are direct indicators of the ROH on related initiatives. For instance, enhancing team cohesion can lead to better project outcomes and a more supportive work environment.

Critical Thinking & Problem Solving: Research also demonstrates a crucial correlation between presence and problem solving (Baer, 2003; Langer & Moldoveanu, 2000) as well as meta-cognition (Kudesia, 2019) and dialectical thinking (Gill et al., 2015) which are all essential to navigating complex, adaptive challenges. 

Ethical Decision Making: Making the right choices at work doesn't only boil down to performance. Increased presence is shown to supercharge ethical awareness and decision making by awakening employees to the ethical dimensions behind the choices they make (Butterfield et al., 2000; Kish-Gephart et al., 2019; Rest, 1986; Reynolds & Miller, 2015; Sonenshein, 2007) as well as "moral disengagement", or the way they subconsciously talk themselves out of doing the right thing (Brendel & Hankerson,  2021)

ROI Examples

  1. Employee Engagement and Satisfaction:

    • Scenario: Implementing the Learning Style Inventory.

    • Calculation: If the baseline eNPS is 30 and improves to 50 after implementation, calculate the financial impact of higher engagement on productivity and turnover.

    • Equation: ROI = [(Increased productivity value + Turnover cost savings) - Program cost] / Program cost * 100.

    • Example: Increased productivity adds $50,000, reduced turnover saves $20,000, and program cost is $10,000. ROI = [($50,000 + $20,000) - $10,000] / $10,000 * 100 = 600%.

  2. Efficiency and Task Completion:

    • Scenario: Using the Eisenhower Box to improve focus.

    • Calculation: Baseline task completion rate is 70%. After using the Eisenhower Box, it improves to 85%.

    • Equation: ROI = [(Number of additional tasks completed * Average task value) - Training cost] / Training cost * 100.

    • Example: 15% increase in task completion at $200/task, training cost $5,000. ROI = [(150 * $200) - $5,000] / $5,000 * 100 = 500%.

  3. Innovation and Creativity:

    • Scenario: Applying the Four Columns Exercise to challenge assumptions.

    • Calculation: The average time from idea to implementation is reduced by 20 days, leading to faster market entry and increased revenue.

    • Equation: ROI = [(Increased revenue from faster time-to-market) - Cost of Four Columns Exercise workshops] / Cost of Four Columns Exercise workshops * 100.

    • Example: Increased revenue of $100,000, workshop cost $10,000. ROI = [$100,000 - $10,000] / $10,000 * 100 = 900%.

    Well-Being and Stress Reduction:

    • Scenario: Implementing Motivational Interviewing.

    • Calculation: Stress levels decrease by 25%, leading to fewer sick days and higher productivity.

    • Equation: ROI = [(Cost savings from reduced sick days + Increased productivity) - Cost of Motivational Interviewing program] / Cost of Motivational Interviewing program * 100.

    • Example: $10,000 savings from reduced sick days, $15,000 increased productivity, program cost $5,000. ROI = [($10,000 + $15,000) - $5,000] / $5,000 * 100 = 400%.

    Collaboration and Team Cohesion:

    • Scenario: Conducting Collaborative Inquiry sessions.

    • Calculation: Team satisfaction survey scores improve, leading to lower turnover and better project outcomes.

    • Equation: ROI = [(Savings from reduced turnover + Value of improved project outcomes) - Cost of Collaborative Inquiry sessions] / Cost of Collaborative Inquiry sessions * 100.

    • Example: $15,000 savings from reduced turnover, $20,000 improved project outcomes, session cost $5,000. ROI = [($15,000 + $20,000) - $5,000] / $5,000 * 100 = 600%.

Great Reads

"In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life" by Robert Kegan

  • Amazon Link: In Over Our Heads

  • Overview: Kegan explores the increasing complexity of modern life and how it challenges our mental capacities. The book provides a framework for understanding how to support individuals and organizations in developing the mental capabilities needed to navigate and thrive in complex environments.

"Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant" by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne

  • Amazon Link: Blue Ocean Strategy

  • Overview: This book introduces the concept of creating "blue oceans" of uncontested market space through innovation and value differentiation. It offers practical tools and strategies for organizations to break out of competitive markets and generate new demand, fostering a culture of strategic creativity and wisdom.

"The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization" by Peter M. Senge

  • Amazon Link: The Fifth Discipline

  • Overview: Senge's classic work on systems thinking encourages readers to see beyond their current assumptions and embrace a broader perspective. It offers tools for creating a learning organization that values continuous improvement and innovation.

"The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail" by Clayton M. Christensen

  • Amazon Link: The Innovator's Dilemma

  • Overview: Christensen explains how successful companies can fail by sticking to their established routines and not embracing disruptive innovations. This book challenges readers to rethink their approach to change and innovation.

"Mindset: The New Psychology of Success" by Carol S. Dweck

  • Amazon Link: Mindset

  • Overview: Dweck's research on fixed and growth mindsets offers a powerful framework for challenging self-limiting beliefs and assumptions. The book provides practical advice on how to cultivate a growth mindset and embrace challenges.

"Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us" by Daniel H. Pink

  • Amazon Link: Drive

  • Overview: Pink explores the science of motivation and argues that autonomy, mastery, and purpose are the key drivers of human behavior. This book encourages readers to look beyond self-interest and engage in meaningful work.

"The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace" by John Paul Lederach

  • Amazon Link: The Moral Imagination

  • Overview: Lederach shares his experiences in conflict resolution and peacebuilding, emphasizing the importance of creativity, empathy, and moral imagination. This book challenges readers to think deeply about their impact on the world and engage in transformative work.

Validation Study

The Headspace assessment, grounded in the concept of Ways of Being, was thoroughly validated through rigorous research conducted by Dr. William Brendel, Dr. Sangwon Byun, and Dr. Mi Hee Park. Their award-winning article, "Ways of Being: Assessing Presence and Purpose at Work," provides a detailed explanation of the research methodology and results, demonstrating the assessment's reliability and validity.

The researchers employed Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) as a key part of their validation process. CFA is a statistical technique used to verify the factor structure of a set of observed variables, essentially checking whether the data fits a hypothesized measurement model. In simpler terms, CFA is like double-checking that the questions in the assessment actually measure what they’re supposed to measure. The importance of CFA lies in its ability to ensure that the assessment accurately identifies the different headspaces as intended, akin to making sure that the pieces of a puzzle fit together perfectly to reveal the intended picture.

In their study, Brendel and his colleagues achieved high fit indices in their CFA, which indicated that the hypothesized model fit well with the observed data. Specifically, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was 0.95, and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) was 0.06. These statistics demonstrate that the assessment structure is sound and that it accurately identifies the four headspaces.

Another critical aspect of the validation process was testing the internal consistency reliability of the assessment. This refers to the consistency of results across items within a test, typically measured using Cronbach's Alpha. Think of this as checking that all the questions on the assessment are reliably measuring the same thing. High internal consistency means that the assessment produces stable and consistent results. In this study, the Cronbach's Alpha scores for the four headspaces ranged from 0.82 to 0.89. Such high scores indicate excellent internal consistency, providing confidence that the results are dependable.

The researchers also focused on construct validity, which assesses whether the tool truly measures the concept it claims to measure. It’s like verifying that a thermometer accurately measures temperature, not humidity. Ensuring construct validity is crucial as it guarantees that the assessment accurately captures the essence of the headspaces—presence and purpose in this case—providing meaningful and accurate insights into one’s headspace. The positive feedback from participants further supported the construct validity, with many finding the assessment relevant and insightful in their real-world experiences.

These rigorous statistical analyses and validations confirm that the Headspace assessment is both valid and reliable. The high fit indices from the CFA, the excellent internal consistency indicated by Cronbach's Alpha scores, and the positive participant feedback collectively ensure that the assessment provides an accurate reflection of one’s current headspace. The thorough research behind this assessment should instill confidence that the insights gained are grounded in robust scientific methods and real-world applicability.


Originally introduced in 2012 by Dr. William Brendel, the concept of headspaces, initially termed "Ways of Being," forms the foundation of the assessment you just completed. Dr. Brendel later partnered with Dr. Sangwon Byun and Dr. Mi Hee Park in a multi-year study to psychometrically validate his assessment, resulting in an award-winning article presented at the 2024 Academy of Management Conference titled, Ways of Being: Assessing Presence and Purpose at Work. In this groundbreaking work, Dr. Brendel and his colleagues established that these four headspaces are both distinct and crucial for understanding how individuals interact with their work and colleagues.


Abdelsalam, O., Chantziaras, A., Ibrahim, M., & Omoteso, K. (2020). The impact of religiosity on earnings quality: International evidence from the banking sector. The British Accounting Review, 53(6), 100957.


Allan, B. A., Batz-Barbarich, C., Sterling, H. M., & Tay, L. (2019). Outcomes of meaningful work: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 56(3), 500-528. Allen, T. D., & Kiburz, K. M. (2012). Trait mindfulness and work–family balance among working parents: The mediating effects of vitality and sleep quality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 372-379.


Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432-443.


Alshehri, F., Fotaki, M., & Kauser, S. (2020). The effects of spirituality and religiosity on the ethical judgment in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 174(3), 567-593.


Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review, 69(3).


Ashmos, D. P., & Duchon, D. (2000). Spirituality at work: A conceptualization and measure. Journal of management inquiry, 9(2), 134-145.


Avants, S. K., & Margolin, A. (2004). Development of spiritual self-Schema (3-S) therapy for the treatment of addictive and HIV risk behavior: A convergence of cognitive and Buddhist psychology. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 14(3), 253-289. 0479.14.3.253 24 


Azanza, G., Moriano, J. A., Molero, F., & Mangin, J. P. L. (2015). The effects of authentic leadership on turnover intention. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(8), 955-971.


Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 125-143. https://doi:10.1093/clipsy/bpg015


Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assessment, 11(3), 191-206.


Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27-45.


Bailey, C., Yeoman, R., Madden, A., Thompson, M., & Kerridge, G. (2019). A review of the empirical literature on meaningful work: Progress and research agenda. Human Resource Development Review, 18(1), 83-113.


Barney, J. B., Wicks, J., Otto Scharmer, C., & Pavlovich, K. (2015). Exploring transcendental leadership: A conversation. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 12(4), 290-304.


Barnhart, R. (1995). The concise dictionary of English etymology. HarperCollins. Barros, C. P., & Athanassiou, M. (2015). Efficiency in European seaports with DEA: evidence from Greece and Portugal. In Port management (pp. 293-313). Palgrave Macmillan.


Belwalkar, S., Vohra, V., & Pandey, A. (2018). The relationship between workplace spirituality, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors–an empirical study. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(2), 410-430


Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., Segal, Z. V., Abbey, S., Speca, M., Velting, D., & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230-241.


Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Lau, M., Anderson, N. C., Carlson, L., Shapiro, S. L., et al. (2003). The Toronto Mindfulness Scale: Development and validation. Manuscript under review. Block, N. (1995). On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18(2), 227-247.


Blount, S., & Leinwand, P. (2019). Why are we here?: If you want employees who are more engaged and productive, give them a purpose-one concretely tied to your customers and your strategy. Harvard Business Review, 2019(November-December), 1-9


Bodhi, B. (2011). What does mindfulness really mean? A canonical perspective. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(1), 19-39.


Boyatzis, R. E., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: Renewing yourself and connecting with others through mindfulness, hope, and compassion. Harvard Business Press.


Brendel, W. (2016). Mindfulness based consulting. In D. W. Jamieson, R. C. Barnett, & A. F. Buomo (Eds.), Consultation for Organizational Change Revisited: Research in Management Consulting and Contemporary Trends in Organization Development and Change Series (pp. 129-152). Information Age Publishing.


Brendel, W., & Bennett, C. (2016). Learning to embody leadership through mindfulness and somatics practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(3), 409-425.


Brendel, W., Hankerson, S., Byun, S., & Cunningham, B. (2016). Cultivating leadership Dharma: Measuring the impact of regular mindfulness practice on creativity, resilience, tolerance for ambiguity, anxiety and stress. Journal of Management Development, 35(8), 1056-1078.


Brendel, W., & Hankerson, S. (2021). Hear no evil? Investigating relationships between mindfulness and moral disengagement at work. Ethics & Behavior. https://doi: 10.1080/10508422.2021.1958331


Brendel, W. (2022). Conscious Organization Development: A distinctly mindful theory and practice. Organization Development Journal, 40(3), 77-89.


Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848. https://doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822


Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 211-237.


Buchheld, N., Grossman, P., & Walach, H. (2001). Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (Vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: The development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Journal for Meditation and Meditation Research, 1(1), 11-34.


Cable, D., & Vermeulen, F. (2017). Making work meaningful: A leader’s guide. Management Science, 63(6), 1673-95. Cardona, P. (2000). Transcendental leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(4), 201-207.


Carlson, L. E., & Brown, K. W. (2005). Validation of the mindful attention awareness scale in a cancer population. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 58(1), 29-33.


Cash, K. C., & Gray, G. R. (2000). A framework for accommodating religion and spirituality in the workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14(3), 124-133.


Catak, P. D. (2012). The Turkish version of mindful attention awareness scale: Preliminary findings. Mindfulness, 3(1), 1-9.


Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. Oxford university press.


Chalofsky, N. (2003). An emerging construct for meaningful work. Human Resource Development International, 6(1), 69-83.


Chen, S., & Jordan, C. H. (2018). Incorporating ethics into brief mindfulness practice: Effects on well-being and prosocial behavior. Mindfulness, 11, 18-29. https://doi:10.1007/s12671-018-0915-2


Cheung-Judge, M.Y. (2012). The self as an instrument: A cornerstone for the future of OD. OD Practitioner, 33(3), 11-16. Chodron, P. (2007). No time to lose: A timely guide to the way of the Bodhisattva. Shambhala Publications.


Cohen, B. (1989). Developing sociological knowledge. 2nd ed. Nelson-Hall Cohen, B. P. (2003). Creating, Testing, and Applying Social Psychological Theories. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(1), 5. https://doi:10.2307/3090137


Cohen, J., & Birkinshaw, J. (2013). Make your knowledge workers more productive. Harvard Business Review.


Colzato, L. S., Ozturk, A., & Hommel, B. (2012). Meditate to create: the impact of focused-attention and open-monitoring training on convergent and divergent thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 3,116.


Conger, J. A. (1994). Spirit at work: Discovering the spirituality in leadership. Jossey-Bass. Conroy, S. J., & Emerson, T. L. (2004). Business ethics and religion: Religiosity as a predictor of ethical awareness among students. Journal of business ethics, 50(4), 383-396.


Craig, N., & Snook, S. (2014). From purpose to impact. Harvard Business Review, 92(5), 104-111.


Criswell, C., & Campbell, D. (2008). Image counts: Building an authentic leadership presence. Leadership in Action, 28(2), 13-17.


Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the workplace. Journal of Management, 37(4), 997-1018. Dehler, G., and Welsh, M.: 1994, Spirituality and organizational transformation: Implications for the new management paradigm. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(6), 17-26.


Demailly, C., & Brighton, D. (2014). HR, be the change you wish to see! People & Strategy, 37(1), 4-5.


Deng, Y.-Q., Li, S., Tang, Y.-Y., Zhu, L.-H., Ryan, R., & Brown, K. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Chinese translation of the mindful attention awareness scale (MAAS). Mindfulness, 3(1), 10-14.


Dennett, D.C. (1968). Content and Consciousness. Routledge and Kegan Paul. De Tarde, G. (1903). The laws of imitation. H. Holt. Dhingra, N., Emmett, J., Samo, A., & Schaninge, B. (2020). Igniting individual purpose in times of crisis. McKenzie Quarterly. ights/Igniting%20individual%20purpose%20in%20times%20of%20crisis/Igniting-individualpurpose-in-times-of-crisis.pdf


Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2010). Goals, attention, and (Un)consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 61(1), 467-490.


Dreyfus, G. (2011). Is mindfulness present-centred and non-judgmental? A discussion of the cognitive dimensions of mindfulness. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(1), 41-54.


Duchon, D., & Plowman, D. A. (2005). Nurturing the spirit at work: Impact on work unit performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 807-833.


Dudley, R. L., & Cruise, R. J. (1990). Measuring religious maturity: A proposed scale. Review of Religious Research, 32(2), 97-103. Edwards, M. (2004). Good for business: An integral theory perspective on spirituality in organisations. Spirituality Leadership and Management.


Eggert, N. J. (1998). Contemplative leadership for entrepreneurial organizations: Paradigms, metaphors, and wicked problems. Praeger.


Ehrlich, J. (2015). Creating mindful leaders and organizations. People and Strategy, 38(3), 22-25. Elias, D. (1997). Transforming learning into action: A case study. Revision, 20(1), 3.


Emmons, R. A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: Motivation and spirituality in personality. Guilford Press. Engemann, K. N., & Scott, C. W. (2020). Voice in safety-oriented organizations: Examining the intersection of hierarchical and mindful social contexts. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100650.


Fairholm, G. W. (1997). Capturing the heart of leadership: Spirituality and community in the new American workplace. Praeger.


Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2003). Waking up! mindfulness in the face of bandwagons. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 54-70.


Fisher, K., & Robbins, C. R. (2014). Embodied leadership: Moving from leader competencies to leaderful practices. Leadership, 11(3), 281-299.


Ford, J., Harding, N. H., Gilmore, S., & Richardson, S. (2017). Becoming the leader: Leadership as material presence. Organization Studies, 38(11), 1553-1571.


Fornaciari, C. J., & Lund Dean, K. (2009). Foundations, lessons, and insider tips for MSR research. Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, 6(4), 301-321.


Fosslien, L. (2021). What you're getting wrong about burnout. MIT Sloan Management Review.


Frémeaux, S., & Pavageau, B. (2020). Meaningful leadership: How can leaders contribute to meaningful work? Journal of Management Inquiry, 31(1), 54-66.


Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693-727.


Fry, L. W. (2008). Spiritual leadership: State-of-the-art and future directions for theory, research, and practice. In J. Biberman & L. Tischler (Eds.), Spirituality in Business (pp. 106-124). Palgrave Macmillan US.


Fry, L., & Kriger, M. (2009). Towards a theory of being-centered leadership: Multiple levels of being as context for effective leadership. Human Relations, 62(11), 1667-1696.


Fry, L. W., Vitucci, S., & Cedillo, M. (2005). Spiritual leadership and army transformation: Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 835-862.


Gandhi, M. (1958). Evil wrought by the English medium. Navajivan Publishing House. Garcia-Zamor, J.-C. (2003). Workplace spirituality and organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 63(3), 355-363.


Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumba, F. O. (2005). Can you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343-372.


Gast, A., Probst, N., & Simpson, B. (2020). Purpose, not platitudes: A personal challenge for top executives. McKenzie Quarterly.


George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value (Vol. 18). John Wiley & Sons.


George, B. (2010). True north: Discover your authentic leadership (Vol. 143). John Wiley & Sons. Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2010). The science of workplace spirituality. In Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance (pp. 19-42). Routledge.


Gill, M., Waltz, J., Suhrbier, P., & Robert, L. (2015). Non-duality and the integration of mindfulness into psychotherapy: Qualitative research with meditating therapists. Mindfulness, 6(4), 708-722. https://doi:10.1007/s12671-014-0310-6


Glomb, T. M., Duffy, M. K., Bono, J. E., & Yang, T. (2011). Mindfulness at work. In A. Joshi, H. Liao, & J. J. Martocchio (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 30, (pp. 115- 157). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.


Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2005). Managing authenticity: the paradox of great leadership. Harvard Business Review, 83(12), 86-94. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.


Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal leadership: Unleashing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business Review Press.


Good, D. J., Lyddy, C. J., Glomb, T. M., Bono, J. E., Brown, K. W., Duffy, M. K., ... & Lazar, S. W. (2016). Contemplating mindfulness at work: An integrative review. Journal of management, 42(1), 114-142.


Grabovac, A. D., Lau, M. A., & Willett, B. R. (2011). Mechanisms of mindfulness: A buddhist psychological model. Mindfulness, 2(3), 154-166.


Greenberg, M. T., & Mitra, J. L. (2015). From mindfulness to right mindfulness: The intersection of awareness and ethics. Mindfulness, 6(1), 74-78.


Grossman, P., & Van Dam, N. T. (2011). Mindfulness, by any other name…: Trials and tribulations of sati in western psychology and science. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(1), 219-239.


Gunn, R. W. (2006). Be the change you wish to see in the world. Strategic Finance, 87(9), 12.


Hanley, A. W., Mehling, W. E., & Garland, E. L. (2017). Holding the body in mind: Interoceptive awareness, dispositional mindfulness and psychological wellbeing. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 99, 13-20. https://doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.05.014


Hansen, E., Lundh, L., Homman, A., & Wångby‐Lundh, M. (2009). Measuring mindfulness: Pilot studies with the Swedish versions of the mindful attention awareness scale and the Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 38(1), 2-15.


Hargrave, T. D., & Sells, J. N. (1997). The development of a forgiveness scale. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 23(1), 41-62.


Harvey, R. J., Billings, R. S., & Nilan, K. J. (1985). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Job Diagnostic Survey: Good news and bad news. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(3), 461-468.


Hassenzahl, M., Wiklund-Engblom, A., Bengs, A., Hägglund, S., & Diefenbach, S. (2015). Experience-oriented and product-oriented evaluation: Psychological need fulfillment, positive affect, and product perception. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(8), 530-544.


Hawley, J. (1993). Reawakening the spirit in work: The power of dharmic management (1st ed). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.


Horan, R. (2009). The neuropsychological connection between creativity and meditation. Creativity Research Journal, 21(2-3), 199-222. doi:10.1080%2F10400410902858691


Hülsheger, U. R., Lang, J. W., Depenbrock, F., Fehrmann, C., Zijlstra, F. R., & Alberts, H. J. (2014). The power of presence: the role of mindfulness at work for daily levels and change trajectories of psychological detachment and sleep quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1113-1128.


Hutcherson, C. A., Seppala, E. M., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Loving-kindness meditation increases social connectedness. Emotion, 8(5), 720-724.


Jamieson, D., Auron, M; Shechtman, D. (2010). Managing use of self for masterful professional practice. OD Practitioner, 42(3), 4-11


Jamieson, D. & Davidson, J. (2019). Advancing thinking and practice on use of self. OD Journal, 37(1), 39-54.


Jermann, F., Billieux, J., Larøi, F., d'Argembeau, A., Bondolfi, G., Zermatten, A., & Van der Linden, M. (2009). Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS): Psychometric properties of the French translation and exploration of its relations with emotion regulation strategies. Psychological Assessment, 21(4), 506-514.


Johnson, W. H. A. (2007). Mechanisms of tacit knowing: Pattern recognition and synthesis. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(4), 123-139.


Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144-156. Karakas, F. (2010). Spirituality and performance in organizations: A literature review. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1) pp. 89-106.


Kempster, S., Jackson, B., & Conroy, M. (2011). Leadership as purpose: Exploring the role of purpose in leadership practice. Leadership, 7(3), 317-334.


Kinjerski, V., & Skrypnek, B. J. (2017). Measuring the intangible: Development of the spirit at work scale. Academy of Management.


Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications. Konz, G. N. P., &


Ryan, F. X. (1999). Maintaining an organizational spirituality: No easy task. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(3), 200-210.


Kriger, M., & Seng, Y. (2005). Leadership with inner meaning: A contingency theory of leadership based on the worldviews of five religions. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 771-806.


Kudesia, R. S. (2019). Mindfulness as metacognitive practice. Academy of Management Review, 44(2), 405-423. https://doi:10.5465/amr.2015.0333


Kumar, K. (2021, October 26). The Great Resignation: American workers suffering a crisis of meaning. Rand Corporation.


Landrum, N. E., & Gardner, C. L. (2005). Using integral theory to effect strategic change. Journal of Organizational Change Management.


Landrum, N. E., & Gardner, C. L. (2012). An Integral Theory Perspective on the Firm. International Journal of Business Insights & Transformation, 4.


Landrum, N. E., Gardner, C. L., & Boje, D. M. (2013). A values-based and integral perspective of strategic management. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 6(1), 9. &as_sdt=0%2C39&q=A+valuesbased+and+integral+perspective+of+strategic+management&btnG=&httpsredir=1&article=1079 &context=jvbl


Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000). Mindfulness research and the future. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 129-139. https://doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00155


Langer, E. J. (2007). On becoming an artist: Reinventing yourself through mindful creativity. Ballantine Books.


Lau, M. A., Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Buis, T., Anderson, N. D., Carlson, L., Shapiro, S., Carmody, J., Abbey, S., & Devins, G. (2006). The Toronto mindfulness scale: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(12), 1445-1467.


Lawrie, E. J., Tuckey, M. R., & Dollard, M. F. (2018). Job design for mindful work: The boosting effect of psychosocial safety climate. Journal of Occupational Health psychology, 23(4), 483-495.


Lawlor, M. S., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Gadermann, A. M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2014). A validation study of the mindful attention awareness scale adapted for children. Mindfulness, 5(6), 730-741.


Levine, L. (1994). Listening with spirit and the art of team dialogue. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(1), 61-73.


Li, M. J., Black, D. S., & Garland, E. L. (2016). The Applied Mindfulness Process Scale (AMPS): A process measure for evaluating mindfulness-based interventions. Personality and individual differences, 93, 6-15.


Lips-Wiersma, Marjolein, & Wright, Sarah. (2012). Measuring the meaning of meaningful work: Development and validation of the Comprehensive Meaningful Work Scale (CMWS). Group & Organization Management, 37(5), 655-685. L


oy, D. (1996). Lack and transcendence: The problem of death and life in psychotherapy, existentialism, and buddhism. Humanity Books.


Lumsden, D. (2013). Whole life narratives and the self. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, 20(1), 1-10.


Lychnell, L. (2015, January). When work becomes meditation: A case study of how managers use work as a tool for personal growth [Paper presentation]. The 2015 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver, Canada.


Lysova, E. I., Allan, B. A., Dik, B. J., Duffy, R. D., & Steger, M. F. (2019). Fostering meaningful work in organizations: A multi-level review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110, 374-389.


MacKillop, J., & Anderson, E. J. (2007). Further psychometric validation of the mindful attention awareness scale (MAAS). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 29(4), 289-293.


Mantzios, M., Wilson, J. C., & Giannou, K. (2015). Psychometric properties of the Greek versions of the self-compassion and mindful attention and awareness scales. Mindfulness, 6(1), 123-132.


Marcel, A. J., & Bisiach, E. (Eds.). (1988). Consciousness in contemporary science. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.


Mason, E., & Welsh, A. (1994). Symbolism in managerial decision making. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9(6), 27-35.


May, R. (1975). The courage to create. W.W. Norton & Company. Mesmer-Magnus, J., Manapragada, A., Viswesvaran, C., & Allen, J. W. (2017). Trait mindfulness at work: A meta-analysis of the personal and professional correlates of trait mindfulness. Human Performance, 30(2-3), 79-98.


Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (1st ed). Jossey-Bass Publishers.


Miller, D. W., & Ewest, T. (2013). The integration box (Tib): An individual and institutional faith, religion, and spirituality at work assessment tool. In J. Neal (Ed.), Handbook of Faith and Spirituality in the Workplace (pp. 403-417). Springer. 1_2


Minahan, M & Forrester, R. (2019). Use of Self: A Process Model. OD Journal, 37(1), 17-30 Mindful Leadership. (2021, December 10). Retrieved from


Mitroff, I. I., & Denton, E. A. (1999). A spiritual audit of corporate America: A hard look at spirituality, religion, and values in the workplace. Jossey-Bass.


Monteiro, L., & Musten, F. (2013). Mindfulness starts here: An eight-week guide to skillful living. Friesen Press.


Monteiro, L. M., Musten, R. F., & Compson, J. (2015). Traditional and contemporary mindfulness: Finding the middle path in the tangle of concerns. Mindfulness, 6(1), 1-13.


Montgomery, D. E., Fine, M. A., & James-Myers, L. (1990). The development and validation of an instrument to assess an optimal afrocentric world view. Journal of Black Psychology, 17(1), 37-54.


Moxley, R. S. (2000). Leadership and spirit: Breathing new vitality and energy into individuals and organizations. Jossey‐Bass Publishers.


Nasab, A. H., & Afshari, L. (2019). Authentic leadership and employee performance: mediating role of organizational commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(5), 548-560.


National Bank Group on Health (2021, December 9). The employer investment in employee wellbeing: Tenth annual employer-sponsored health and well-being survey.


Natsoulas, T. (1978). Consciousness. American Psychologist, 33(10), 906-914.


Nelkin, N. (1993). What is Consciousness? Philosophy of Science, 60(3), 419-34. Newell, A. (1992). SOAR as a unified theory of cognition: Issues and explanations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,15(3), 464-492.


Nikolova, M., & Cnossen, F. (2020). What makes work meaningful and why economists should care about it. Labour Economics, 65, 101847.


Paloutzian, R. F., & Ellison, C. W. (1982). Loneliness, spiritual well-being and the quality of life. In L. A. Peplau & D. P. John (Eds.), Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy (pp. 224-237). Wiley Interscience.


Paloutzian, R. F., Emmons, R. A., & Keortge, S. G. (2003). Spiritual well-being, spiritual intelligence, and healthy workplace policy. In R. F. Paloutzina, R. A. Emmons, & S. G. Keortge (Eds.), Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance, (pp. 123-137). Routledge.


Pandey, A., Gupta, R. K., & Arora, A. P. (2009). Spiritual climate of business organizations and its impact on customers’ experience. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(2), 313-332.


Petchsawang, P., & Duchon, D. (2012). Workplace spirituality, meditation, and work performance. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 9(2), 189-208.


Petchsawang, P., & McLean, G. N. (2017). Workplace spirituality, mindfulness meditation, and work engagement. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 14(3), 216-244.


Prakash, R., Fountain-Zargoza, S., Kramer, A. F., Samimy, S., & Wegman, J. (2020). Mindfulness and Attention: Current state-of-affairs and future considerations. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 4, 340-367. https://doi:10.1007/s41465-019-00144-5


Pugh, A. (2020). An introduction to tensegrity. University of California Press.


Purser, R. E. (2018). Critical perspectives on corporate mindfulness. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 15(2), 105-108. Putz, M. and Raynor, M.E. (2005). Integral leadership: Overcoming the paradox of growth, Strategy & Leadership, 33(1), 46-48.

Quinn, R. E., & Thakor, A. V. (2018). Creating a purpose-driven organization. Harvard Business Review, 96(4), 78-85.


Raines, S. S. (2018). Becoming the change we wish to see: The unexpected benefits of conflict resolution work. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 35(3), 319-327.


Reams, J. (2005). What’s integral about leadership? A reflection on leadership and integral theory. Integral Review, 1(1), 118-132.


Reave, L. (2005). Spiritual values and practices related to leadership effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 16 (5), 655-687.


Ribeiro, N., Gomes, D., & Kurian, S. (2018). Authentic leadership and performance: the mediating role of employees’ affective commitment. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(1), 213-225.


Renard, Michelle, & Snelgar, Robin J. (2016). Measuring positive, psychological rewards: The validation of the Intrinsic Work Rewards Scale. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 26(3), 209-215.


Ribeiro, N., Duarte, A. P. & Filipe, R. How authentic leadership promotes individual performance: mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior and creativity. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(9), 1585-1607.


Rogers, C. (1980). A Way of Being. Houghton Mifflin Company. Ruedy, N. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2010). In the moment: The effect of mindfulness on ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(1), 73-87.


Rutledge, D. N., Wickman, M., & Winokur, E. J. (2018). Instrument validation: Hospital nurse perceptions of meaning and joy in work. Journal of nursing measurement, 26(3), 579-588.


Scharf, J. H. (2013). Nervensystem: Sensible Ganglien. Springer-Verlag.


Seashore, C., Shawver, M., Thompson, G. and Mattare, M. (2004). Doing good by knowing who you are: The instrumental self as an agent of change. OD Practitioner, 36(3), 55-60.


Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). “What’s your story?” A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 395-417.


Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(3), 373-386.


Shapiro, S. L., Jazaieri, H., & Goldin, P. R. (2012). Mindfulness-based stress reduction effects on moral reasoning and decision making. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 7(6), 504-515. https://doi:10.1080/17439760.2012.723732


Sheep, M. L. (2006). Nurturing the whole person: The ethics of workplace spirituality in a society of organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(4), 357-375.


Sinclair, A. (2011). Being leaders: Identities and identity work in leadership. In The Sage handbook of leadership, (pp. 508-517). Sage.


Steger, M. F. (2012). Experiencing meaning in life: Optimal functioning at the nexus of well-being, psychopathology, and spirituality. In P. T. P. Wong (Ed.), The human quest for meaning (2nd ed., pp. 165–184). Routledge.


Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322-337.


Stier, J, & Driggs, W. (2021). An Antidote to the Great Resignation.


Steger, M. F., & Frazier, P. (2005). Meaning in life: One link in the chain from religiousness to wellbeing. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 574-582. Tschudy, T. (2006). An OD Map: The Essence of Organisation Development. In Jones, B. and Brazzel, M., Eds., The NTL Handbook of Organisation Development and Change (pp. 157-176), Pfeiffer


Vaill, P. (1998). Spirited leading and learning. Jossey Bass.


Valini, E., Schwartz, J., & Roy, I. (2019, April 11). From employee experience to Human experience: putting meaning back into work. Deloitte Insights.


Van Deurzen, E. (2009). Everyday mysteries: A handbook of existential psychotherapy. Routledge.


Walker, D. A., & Smith, T. J. (2017). Computing Robust, Bootstrap-Adjusted Fit Indices for Use With Nonnormal Data. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 50(1/2), 131-137.


Wilber, K. (1999). Collected Works (Vol. I‐IV). Shambhala Publications.


Wilber, K. (2000a). A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision of Business, Politics, Science, and Spirituality. Shambhala Publications.


Wilber, K. (2000b). Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy. Shambhala Publications.


Wilber, K. (2005). Introduction to integral theory and practice. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 1(1), 2-38.


Wolever, R. Q., Schwartz, E. R., & Schoenberg, P. L. (2018). Mindfulness in corporate America: Is the Trojan horse ethical?. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 24(5), 403-406.


Xiao, Q., Hu, C., & Wang, T. (2020). Mindfulness Practice Makes Moral People More Moral. Mindfulness, 11(11), 2639-2650.


Yalom, I. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. Basic Books Inc. Yalom, I. D. (2008). Staring at the sun: Overcoming the terror of death. Jossey-Bass.


You, J., Kim, S., Kim, K., Cho, A., & Chang, W. (2020). Conceptualizing meaningful work and its implications for HRD. European Journal of Training and Development. 45(1), 36-52.


Zhang, X., Noor, R., & Savalei, V. (2016). Examining the effect of reverse worded items on the factor structure of the need for cognition scale. PLoS ONE, 11(6), 1-15.

bottom of page