Referensi 5

Philosophy of Management (2019) 18:303–330
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-018-0101-6
God, Ontology and Management: A Philosophical Praxis
Margaret R. DiMarco Allen 1
Published online: 5 October 2018

# Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018
Abstract
A philosophy of management that incorporates the big picture of human experience, all levels,
and degrees of awareness in relationship with the world, will better develop and sustain an
environment conducive to creative contributions that meet organizational goals. Quantum
physics reveals the nature of reality to be connection and creativity engaged in a process of
actualizing possibilities. Human beings participate in this process of actualization, as both
observer-creator and experiencer of the universe through multiple domains of knowing – a
collaborator in Alfred North Whitehead’s panexperientialism. Whitehead’s God of process, the
primordial field of creative possibilities, and the consequent nature which holds all the
experiences of every actualization, supports human consciousness, as it self-actualizes by
engaging and integrating the experience of external and internal events and their effects on
awareness. Through understanding the participatory nature of consciousness with God and the
world as experienced, deep meaning emerges for human life. Tapping into this deeper meaning
through a philosophy of management that acknowledges the full human experience, including
the embedded spiritual connection to the creative energy that is God, strengthens an organi-
zation’s vision, mission and contributions to a community. This brief overview traces a path
toward a preliminary framework for a philosophy of management based on God and the ideas
of connection, creativity and process.
Keywords Connection . Consciousness . Creativity . God . Management . Process
Introduction
Stating the Problem
Vaclav Havel (1994) declared that human beings have two options: transcendence or extinc-
tion; there are no other real alternatives. What would extinction look like, how does it begin?
* Margaret R. DiMarco Allen

yeoldesoul@yahoo.com
1
Illinois Council of Health-System Pharmacists, Rockford, IL, USA
304 Philosophy of Management (2019) 18:303–330
Leaders of a medical testing company and a pharma company defraud investors of millions
(Long and Hays 2018; SEC 2018); Bank of America Merrill Lynch altered 16 million
investment orders to mislead clients (Egan 2018); Wells Fargo systematically created fraud-
ulent accounts for commissions and sales quotas (Corkery 2016; Levine 2016); serious mental
health issues go unnoticed / untreated / actively ignored, contributing to devastating conse-
quences in violence, both as a factor in the acts themselves, and as survivor trauma (leaving
aside the controversy of gun control debates); and life expectancy continues a four year drop in
the United States, partly due to the rise in opioid deaths and suicide (Geher 2018; Rice 2018;
Stack 2018; Turner 2018; Woolf 2018). Current events reveal a disturbing disconnect –
manifesting damaged people and broken systems.1
Reframing the Problem
Part of the disconnect is the loss or lack of a conscious awareness of shared humanity and
shared earth, in turn causing the loss or lack of connection to a greater purpose in life, often
coupled with the added weight of struggling with organizational and systemic roadblocks that
impede the ability to contribute one’s talents and skills, whatever one’s work domain (Sardello
1992). Modern science has peeled away certainty, revealing that materialism, determinism and
reductionism are not final, or at the very least, complete descriptions of the essential nature of
the universe; stability and order are replaced by indeterminacy, probability, possibility and
energy-events in a constant process of becoming (Currivan 2017; Godwin 2004). Religion can
have value but fails to resonate with meaning for many when it does not recognize or integrate
human life with the evolving information on nature’s complex ambiguity.2 The fear of change,
and the loss of certainty and stability are disorienting as human beings struggle to find a new
narrative for understanding (Montuori 2014). Meanwhile mismanaged fear can disrupt the
social order with harmful consequences (Douglas 2001).3 Meaning is a powerful force for
human motivation, and many working adults spend a large majority of their time within an
organizational environment. How that environment is managed can have a major impact on the
human connection with meaning, transformation, and a goal of transcendence.4
Matters of Management
Management goals are practical, of course – balancing client / customer satisfaction, budgetary
considerations, technical resources, time, while fulfilling the mission, vision and purpose. But
human motivation (both management and employee) contributes to or hinders the
1
On a global level, one tragic example of spiritual disconnect is the estimated 45.8 million people held in slavery
around the world today; 26% are children; and approximately 2 million of these children are forced into global
sex trafficking slavery (IJM 2017). The list of problems, e.g. terrorism, could go on, but the point is clear.
2
Various studies have been done over the years that show a correlation between religious belief and general well-
being (in education, economics, and relationships) (NBER 2018).
3
Mary Douglas (2001) suggests that certainty is the result of cultural inculcation and social taboos, not facts, and
when the established knowledge becomes confused with opinion, uncertainty and indeterminacy can infect a
society with fear. This fear may beget a rigid pushback by the social order that becomes force, intolerance and
obstructions to intellectual curiosity (and so creativity) (Douglas 2001, 150–152). See Romain Laufer (2017) for
a discussion on how both modern marketing and sophistry actively seek to confuse appearance and reality,
blurring the distinction between knowledge and opinion in the process.
4
Humanity also has made great progress – in medicine and technology, for example; but caring and wise choices
are needed, and not always apparent, in the use of that medicine and technology.
Philosophy of Management (2019) 18:303–330 305
accomplishment of this balancing act; greed, dishonesty, cruelty, and despair reflect a cynicism
of spirit, an absence of spiritual grounding in human experience. Management can acknowl-
edge the tension and complexity between underlying belief and outward action by developing
systems and processes reflecting multiple dimensions of understanding. A philosophy of
management that incorporates the big picture respects both the spiritual and material dimen-
sions of human experience, and in the process: impacts meaning and motivation; inspires and
guides transformative change that strengthens and empowers the individual; develops and
sustains an environment conducive to creative contributions that meet the organization’s
purpose; and thereby grounds the long-term relevance,5 success and even survival of the
individual and the organization, and by extension, the community.6
A Speculative Synthesis Is Proposed
This paper is not an argument for the existence of God – God is an accepted proposition.
Rather, this paper explores a framework for management principles that benefit a transforma-
tive perspective of meaning and work, based on a specific kind of understanding about God in
relationship with the universe and human beings – an understanding that is ‘neutral’ in the
sense that it may provide a resonating (meaning-filled) ground for varied beliefs and religious
experiences, coherent in terms of reality as currently understood by science, and that supports
transformative organizational goals.7 What follows is a speculative synthesis of complemen-
tary ideas for a philosophy of management focused on the goal of human transcendence,
grounded by the underlying spiritual relationship of nature, human life, meaning and God,
derived from the process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and quantum physics, and
reflecting a transdisciplinary epistemology and radical empiricism. The goal is to ground a
process philosophy of management with both physical and spiritual experiential truths.8
Part II is a brief introduction of human knowing that incorporates the plurality of experi-
ence; an historical summary of the process concept; and three complementary process ideas
which are the integrative focus for God, nature, and humanity in the synthesis that follows: 1)
creativity (infinite possibilities, novelty, self-determining choice, influencer of other); 2)
connection (relatedness in its many forms – interacting, sensing, feeling qualities, interdepen-
dence, co-dependence, informing, past accumulating, future tantalizing, the other impacting
and impinging, being impacted and impinged by other); and 3) process itself (evolving,
reflecting, adapting, becoming, learning, changing, transforming). Part III explores five
5
Relevance in this context refers to the community being served by the organization. As noted by Statler and
Salovaara (2017), from a pragmatic perspective, relevance is based on what difference it makes and to whom
(274). Is a need being met, a want being fulfilled?
6
Sometimes holding tight to a greater meaning is what keeps one alive in horrific circumstances – experiences
teach this in heartbreaking moments; see Frank 1993; Frankl 2006; Gary Haugen 2008; and Ilibagiza and Erwin
2014.
7
For purposes of transparency, please note that the author’s academic work focused on personal and organiza-
tional development and transformation. As such, some of the ideas herein are an extension of themes originally
explored in a dissertation case study, with the addition of a consideration of God and process.
8
As Dibben (2010) notes, how one thinks about management Bcan alter what management becomes^ (3), and
spiritually reflective leadership becomes respectful, caring and sensitive (4).
guiding management principles, derived from the specific process perspective in Part II.9 In
this exploration, Being (existence) is viewed as a process of becoming through interdependent
experiencing – as entity acted upon (influenced), acting upon others (influencer), and acting
upon self (self-determination of choice) – and through this process, contributing creatively in
relationship.
World Shifting Paradigm – Creativity, Connection and Process
Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better.
– Albert Einstein
Preliminary Thoughts on a New Worldview
The speculative philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead was influenced by developments in

quantum physics in the early twentieth century. Quantum physics explores the minutest
particles of the universe, the interactions of the atom and its even smaller constituents, the
fundamental components of natural systems (essentially biological, chemical, physical and
cosmological) (Currivan 2017; Epperson 2004; Rosenblum and Kuttner 2011). Classical views
on matter as bits of substance (the atom), operating by natural law, provided a sense of nature’s
order and permanence, with the Newtonian-Cartesian model of reality laid out in an orderly
framework: objective reality exists independent of the observer; matter exists (with energy and
fields); causal determinism exists – bodies do not move unless impacted upon; and there are
location limits, getting from point A to point B requires a passage through space and time
(Currivan 2017; Epperson 2004; Godwin 2004; Laszlo 2016).
But as the new quantum theories on matter and energy were proposed and validated over
the years, the materialistic view of reality shifted from a solid substance of relative permanence
(subject to entropy) to a field of probabilities manifesting individual energy-events out of
multiple possibilities (Currivan 2017; Laszlo 2016). The surprises of quantum physics
overturned human understanding of the natural world, as well as the classical view of God
(Godwin 2004). The universe is a becoming, a transitory series of energy-events, probabilities
and possibilities engaged in a process of actualizing through relationships.
An Optional Historical Pause
Process is a long standing concept in philosophy traced back to ancient Greece when Heraclitus
proposed the dynamic activity of fire (flux) as the essence of all things.10 Plato countered with
unending change coupled with transcendent eternal ideas providing form for the ceaseless
9
The ideas presented herein are derived from specific interpretations of Whitehead and science based on various
readings; other interpretations are available as well. This selection is based on the resonating nature of the ideas in
relation to personal, professional and spiritual experiences. This paper is intended as encouragement and support
for the idea of God as the meaningful ground of a philosophy of management. The references provide a variety of
sources for readers interested in pursuing deeper analysis.
10
Although Heraclitus may have introduced the concept of process into philosophy, it by no means reflects his
total view of reality; see in particular, David Shaw (2018) for a detailed review of Heraclitus’ cosmology and the
ideas of flux (process), Justice (rational laws), and the Unity of Opposites (perpetual strife).
changing. Aristotle considered the dynamic nature of a thing as transitioning toward something –
an end point reflecting the perfected nature of the thing itself. Plotinus explored the One as source
and destination. Leibniz proposed units of activity (monads) coming together to form the
substance of things, as active internally driven processes of change working together harmoni-
ously. Berkeley questioned knowing a thing outside of the sense perceptions of that thing,
introducing immaterialism into the empirical conversation. Hegel introduced the concepts of
Being and Nothing, with the Absolute Idea engaged in a dialectic process of self-development that
is a Becoming. Charles Sanders Peirce (evolving utility through process), William James (all
experiences and relationships are valid and meaningful), John Dewey (individuals are in the
process of self-creating) and Henri Bergson (dynamic change is reality) – each had a pragmatic
aspect to their process views as they respected observed reality and human experiences (McIntosh
2007; Rescher 1996; Stumpf 1975).11
Panexperientialism – Bthe whole of the evidence^12
Whitehead considered natural and human history in developing his metaphysical framework
because he believed all of experience must be accounted for in order to fully understand and
develop meaningful principles of transformative effect (Griffin 2000; Whitehead 1997;
Whitehead 1960).13 Basarab Nicolescu (2002) calls this a transdisciplinary method of knowing
based on the both / and dichotomy at the heart of reality (also derived from quantum physics).
Human experience reflects both / and – both a specificity in the particular and a universality in
concepts and ideas.14 From the pragmatic perspective, reality (human life) incorporates
multiple experiences, entities, actions, interactions, communications, etc. (Bereson and
Guillet de Monthoux 2017). Human knowing,15 in turn, is a creative synthesis of comparisons,
similarities, metaphors and analogous concepts across experiential dimensions and from
different disciplines – including viewing the natural world’s models metaphysically and
spiritually, for example, as a means of understanding experience and world building (seeing
with new eyes) (Griffin 2007; Hall 2010; Nicolescu 2002; Wheatley 1999).16
However, Mark R. Dibben (2009) points out that Whitehead was reluctant to study the
Bcorporation^ through metaphysics – to move (leap) from the small to the large – in
contradiction to the necessity of the whole of the evidence in developing a philosophy (22).
Per Ingvar Olsen (2011) in turn, questions using Whitehead’s metaphysics to study organiza-
tions, as it may be a Bstimulating^ exercise but not really productive or pragmatic (69). An
underlying concern is what Whitehead called the Bfallacy of misplaced concreteness^, refer-
enced repeatedly in discussions of Whitehead’s philosophy – that is, human beings tend to
develop abstract concepts to understand and frame experience, and then solidify these into
theoretical explanations of reality declared true and final (Dibben 2009; Schipper 2001;
Whitehead 1997).
11
Per Ingvar Olsen (2011) considers process less a direct line and more a flow of Boccasional major shifts^ (61).
12
Whitehead used Bthe whole of the evidence^ for his cosmology (1925/ Whitehead 1997, vii).
13
Pierre Tielhard de Chardin also considered every human experience as available evidence for creating new
understanding (McIntosh 2007).
14
See William Braud (1997, 9) for a discussion on the practical and the universal.
15
Olsen (2011) suggests that knowing is proposed or theoretical, rather than definitive (66).
16
A common example is how illumination may reference light – allowing one to see in the dark; and
illumination may also reference ideas – allowing one to see in a new way.
But as Dibben (2009) notes, Whitehead did encourage the ongoing speculative exploration
of the whole of the evidence. Olsen (2011) likewise acknowledges that parts of Whitehead’s
philosophy may provide new approaches to understanding organizations,17 and finds value in
the view that a plurality of methods complements process thought while providing potential
for creative insights.18 Meanwhile Statler and Salovaara (2017) consider the pragmatic value
and effect of ideas in practice, and propose that the pursuit of Bvalues-based wisdom^ focused
on improving the quality of life is a valid focus for organization studies (276). Further, beyond
any limited and constrained acceptance of Whitehead’s potential contributions, current events
(evidence) suggest a need to explore new approaches at the very least.
The whole of the evidence then integrates the totality of experience and the emerging
concepts used to describe, interpret and understand (Whitehead 1997). The point for a
philosophy of management: if ideas are adequate and even close to true, they will fit together
and reflect coherence. Thus, as Whitehead noted, if God is real in some sense, God will be
coherent in any system explaining the natural world – for how could God be unnatural?
Likewise, God (with nature and consciousness) will be coherent in a process philosophy of
management and, as part of the natural order, may contribute something of value to human
experience and relationships.
Creativity – God, Infinite Possibilities and Information
For simplicity’s sake, there are three main definitions of God: 1) classical theism, in which God
is whole and independent of, and the necessary cause of the world – God does not need us to
exist, but we needed God to create us so we may exist; 2) pantheism, in which God is both
creator of the world and the full expression of the world created – God does not need us to
exist, but we needed God to create us, which God did by creating the world such that God is
(in) all the natural world – one and the same; and 3) panentheism, in which God is both / and,
both independent creator of all, and that which contains all that is the universe (all-inclusive),
thus confirming God is more than the world, as its creator, and more than the world that is
created (Griffin 2014; Hartshorne and Reese 1976).19
God as Source of Creativity
Whitehead described God as Bthe poet of the world, with tender patience leading it by his
vision of truth, beauty, and goodness^ (Whitehead 1978, 346). God is in a sense both
independent and all-inclusive – as the primordial actuality, the ground of becoming for all
that is and will be (the source of infinite possibilities); and as an evolving consequent nature
(becoming in process) that is based on the experiences of the created world existing within
God.20 As the expression of ultimate creativity (pure potentiality and novelty), God is moving
17
Whitehead’s view on creativity is useful in understanding chaos theory and innovation in organization (Olsen
2011).
18
See Olsen (2011) also for references (72) to Andrew H. Van de Ven and Marshall Scott Poole’s paper
analyzing various complementary approaches to studying organizations.
19
These views have inspired a vast body of discussions on God’s nature and relationship to the world.
20
Similar to Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover (the foundation of Thomas Aquinas’ God) – being is pure actuality, the
eternal principle of motion and ground of all potentiality, attracting all things to actualize the potentiality that is
perfection of form (Stumpf 1975; Whitehead 1978, 344).
from one to many21; while God‘s primordial aim draws (lures) the creation toward an increase
in complexity in harmony (of form, function and relationship) as a whole (Whitehead 1978).22
Nature’s Creativity
Creativity is both a quality of the unfolding reality, and as multiple possibilities, a quality of the
energy-event underlying quantum reality. Consider one of nature’s examples – in experiments
the Bmischievous^ neutrino begins as a muon neutrino; by the end of the experiment, it has
transformed into an electron neutrino, or possibly a tau neutrino, or maybe it stays a muon;
something (potentially in the nature of the neutrino reacting to the environment and / or the
journey from point A to point B) impacts the original neutrino such that it may transform
(Moskowitz 2017, 35).23 But the neutrino contains within itself the information of every
potential option in the transformation process.
Mutations within the process of natural selection present a biological variation of creativity
as well. Every species contains divergent members – nature’s way of exploring options – with
alternative possibilities opening the window for creative adaptations, while also keeping a
species viable and relevant in case of a catastrophic event (Kolbert 2014). Luciano Floridi
(2011) references information as an ultimate concept, Bas fundamental and important as Being,
knowledge, life, intelligence, meaning, or good and evil^ (25). Jude Currivan (2017) and Ervin
Laszlo (2016) view information as the possible essence of all that is, but attach a spiritual
dimension based on human experience.24
Questions on Creativity
Presenting creativity as divinity’s ultimate nature has been debated as a weakness of White-
head’s God. Why a creative process? Why is there anything rather than nothing? Does the
universe seek moral right or is morality really aesthetics – which was for Whitehead varied
feelings of appreciation for the contrasts and patterns that become harmony, balance, beauty,
and creativity in the complexity of the evolving world of experience (Brown 1999;
Frankenberry 1987; Whitehead 1978)? Additional questions focus on the relationship of
rationality and creativity. How human beings understand creativity impacts process decisions
and systems development as well. For Whitehead, creativity is the ultimate as the principle of
novelty is the foundation of all; and rationality is in opposition to the novel – dependent on
setting up rules, laws and theoretical worlds (Schipper 2001).25
21
An attribute which has been called divine relativity, event ontology of becoming, process theology’s
panentheism, and God’s manyness-in-oneness (Cobb Jr. and Griffin 1976; Epperson 2004; Frankenberry 1987;
Griffin 2007; Hartshorne 1964).
22
Are human disconnects in current events a natural outcome when fulfilling the primordial aim is stifled or
denied in the human experience?
23
The neutrino is the focus of a 20-year study to learn what informs this transformation process (Moskowitz
2017).
24
A quantum particle may represent a universe of information, an undifferentiated singularity of possibilities –
like a cosmic hologram (Currivan 2017). In a specific kind of hologram, the image is embedded in the glass,
present and visible from every angle in a three dimensional perspective; break the glass, pick up the pieces and
the full original image is still visible in every piece of the shattered glass (Talbot 1991). Is the quantum particle
cosmic DNA?
25
According to Schipper (2001), Bergson agreed with Whitehead, but while William James believed rationalism
excludes novelty, he proposed that the Bsentiment of rationality^ was open to novelty (6).
Frits Schipper (2001) defines three levels of rationality: algorithmic (rigid, set rules,
predictable results); judgmental (flexible, rules as constraints and parameters, emotions and
feelings considered as well); and reflective (open and willing to learn). The latter is essential
for the learning organization, but because reflection is open-ended, it requires some effort as
well. Human nature can take the easy road (of habits and rules) and this choice can
undermine reflection, learning and creativity. Schipper (2001) considers reflective rationality
as open to novelty, innovation, and critical thinking (about the rules as well as experiences),
leading to two kinds of creativity: the first is explorative with new outcomes / results
emerging within an existing framework; and the second is transcendentive, based on radical
reflection, a meta-level perspective leading one to create totally new structures or forms –
that is, outside the box thinking, different from traditional or existing frames of reference.
Although Schipper (2001) suggests one’s views on the relationship of novelty and
rationality will vary based on one’s particular understanding of rationality, from the experi-
ential point of view, rationality and creativity do not seem to be necessarily mutually
exclusive in practice. Consider the act of writing itself – the result of both a rational and
creative component interacting to put words on the blank page (rules of grammar and new
combinations of words, images and ideas).26
However limited or incomplete the human descriptions of reality (or understanding of
novelty) may be, Whitehead clearly acknowledged some spiritual, if not strictly religious,
feeling in the relations of the world, human beings, and God (Bpoet^), and any universe with
a drive toward harmony and balance, will provide a nurturing environment within which an
infinity of complex systems may develop (Epperson 2004; Whitehead 1978, 346). One also
may consider human curiosity and creativity (and hope) as the innate recognition of infinite
possibilities (novelty) at the center of existence.
Connection – The Relatedness of the Universe
Whitehead’s God is Bdipolar^, both influencer and influenced, both lure and sustaining field,
in a balanced relationship with the physical universe (Whitehead 1978, 348). Of particular
interest is how God is in constant connection with the created world in some sense – that
creative pushing outward, suggesting manifest possibilities; and the creative lure drawing
occasions / entities toward a becoming of greater harmony and complexity, presenting
collaborative and participatory opportunities that contribute to the overall experience of the
material universe (Griffin 2014; Whitehead 1978).27 In this activity, separation is an illusion,
relatedness is key.
26
One may observe a variety of creative rationalizations presented for all kinds of behavior as well.
27
This push / pull of the Beternal urge of desire^ is reminiscent of Plotinus’ description of the coming and
going emanations of creation, existing eternally within God, the Source of Intelligence and the World Soul -
creation is pushed out from Source, but always desires to return to Source (Stumpf 1975; Plotinus 1986;
Whitehead 1978, 344). In a similar vein, Tielhard de Chardin proposed that consciousness has an evolutionary
purpose and is being drawn to unify with God (McIntosh 2007; Stumpf 1975). And Jean-Francois Bordron
(2017) suggests that the original thing, the Boriginary^ – is that upon which novelty intrudes, acts, suggests,
and entices toward change, to become a new thing, a new interpretation, a new understanding (242).
Nature’s Connectivity
In Newton’s world, large physical objects are observed and experienced as separate/ but in the
quantum world, separateness is replaced by the instantaneous connectivity of nonlocal entan-
glement. Particle A and particle B begin as connected or entangled in some way, and are then
separated in an experiment; no matter the distance, wherever particle B ends up, it will
instantaneously match (transform) what happened to particle A – A and B remain connected
and each knows (responds) to the other’s situation instantly (Currivan 2017; Rosenblum and
Kuttner 2011). Another example is Schrodinger’s wave function: all possible (infinite) states of
the quantum as photon (that is, the various probabilities for its actualization into an individual
wave or particle), exist within a waveform (the wave/particle probability field); once observed
in some way, the probabilities collapse into a specific single entity in the physical world, but
until that observation, the photon is potentiality - both wave and particle (Currivan 2017;
Laszlo 2016). Thus particles and observers impact each other through transformation events,
and quantum entanglement provides intriguing hints of a connected and participatory universe.
Questions on Connection
One might see the above as giving observation (and information) central roles in the process of
actualization. Is consciousness the core concept of quantum reality, reducing everything that is
to mental processes (as in Kant in which the mental operations are foundational to experience),
or at the very least elevating mind as primary over the physical (Epperson 2004; Frankenberry
1987)? Whitehead countered this concern by giving equal value to both the mind and body
through the interdependent dipolarity of the physical (physical pole) and the act of mind
(mental pole) in unifying the past with a new possibility in the process of choice (or possibly
falling into habit) (Epperson 2004; Whitehead 1978; Whitehead 1997).28
Process – Energy, Becoming and Transformation
In addition to the becoming nature of God and infinite possibilities, Whitehead explored
process itself as the accretion of new experiences becoming layered, or nested, upon previous
experiences. The entity is influenced and impacted by a continuing and expanding differen-
tiation of the individual perspective (like millions of societies and aggregates coming together
as parts, to make a whole, which then become part of a bigger whole) – reflecting that
interdependent dipolarity (Cobb Jr. and Griffin 1976; Frankenberry 1987; Griffin 2007;
Whitehead 1978).
Nature’s Process
The conservation of energy states that form may change at any point in a transformation
process, but the total amount of energy stays constant. No matter what the quantum particles
are doing or not doing, whether existing as object in motion (kinetic energy), impacting and
transferring energy, or only as probabilities waiting to exist (potential energy), the energy of
28
However, Dibben (2009) notes that for Whitehead, consciousness is a result of experience, so the dipolarity
has a lag factor in terms of timing; it is the 4th (or final) phase of an occasion of experience (20).
the physical universe is constant (Currivan 2017; Rosenblum and Kuttner 2011).29 Thus, the
dynamic nature of the quantum actualization process includes a principle of transformation
through adaptation, accumulation and exchange.
Consciousness and Process
Whitehead considered consciousness as a high level human experience and process.30 The
interdependent nature of experience is such that something impacts or influences an entity, and
the entity may use that moment for self-creating, making use of the past and the new input to
alter and function more fully in the present; the process includes an act of selection, a proposal
of concept in a kind of affirmation / negation, a choice of this / not that – on the part of the
living occasion of experience (Dibben 2009; Olsen 2011). Theories of human consciousness
seem to agree that a development process of some kind does take place.31 Neurological studies
support the idea that consciousness integrates subjective and objective experiences, and
biological systems model mutually supportive networks which are constantly creating them-
selves (cellular regeneration – an autopoietic process of self-creation)32; at the same time these
dynamic (living) systems include a chaotic element – a probability factor which inserts new
data as shifting energy transfers and creativity into a system (Combs and Krippner 2003; Sice
and French 2004; Varela 1999; Wheatley 1999). The autopoietic system can reinforce itself
through whatever attractor it focuses upon, positive and negative, so consider mood for
example – sadness slips into the awareness through a sad story or picture, forming a
psychological groove of self-reinforcing attractor energy, drawing similar sad events to the
awareness (Combs 2002, 2009; Combs and Krippner 2003; Sheldrake 2009; Sheldrake et al.
2001). While mood is not the same thing as action, the impact of repeated exposure (desen-
sitization through exposure to violence for example) is a real phenomenon affecting behavior
and has been studied extensively (Grossman and DeGaetano 2014). What an individual
chooses to focus on, and so reinforce, has impact.
29
Based on current observation, the universe consists of 70% dark energy, 25% dark matter and the remaining
5% everything else (human beings, galaxies and the like) – no one knows yet what dark energy and dark matter
are – a mystery and a lure of curiosity (Currivan 2017).
30
Studies reveal that trees share constant communication with each other through a network of filaments just
beneath the surface of the earth; e.g., a tree in the forest is malnourished, other trees hear its sickness and direct
extra nutrients from their supplies to that tree (Simard 2016; Wohlleben 2015). Other experiments show bees,
bacteria, and even amoebas have degrees of experience (Griffin 2007, 59–60). These are examples of a low-level
awareness compatible with Whitehead’s concept of consciousness manifesting in degrees throughout reality. But
is it overstating to use the term consciousness if considered as phases of prehension?
31
For example: Gebser 1986 – consciousness moves through evolutionary stages/levels; Clare Graves –
developmental spiral of value worlds (Beck and Cowan 1996); Tielhard de Chardin – consciousness developed
in complexity as the physical body grew to support it (McIntosh 2007); Ken Wilber (2000) – integral
methodological pluralism with stages, states, levels; David Cooperrider (1986) – appreciative inquiry and the
heliotropic principle – drawn to the light, human beings transform in response to that which is hopeful, positive,
and reinforces creativity.
32
Sice and French (2004) define autopoiesis as the process by which a living organism (system) becomes
individual – through interaction and transformation, the entity generates and regenerates itself, and its compo-
nents, self-organizing in relationships of reciprocal causality: internal to external / local to global as upward
causality; and external to internal / global to local as downward causality (58).
Questions of Process
The nature of the development process and the impact of the attractor on consciousness are
important to the question of individual learning and freedom – how does one understand
change, self-determination, and human choice – good and bad? How does one understand the
tragedy and evil caused directly by human beings? John B. Cobb Jr. (2001) notes that
ultimately one’s problem with evil will reflect one’s concept of God. Classical views justify
evil as serving a greater purpose while retaining God’s omniscience and omnipotence (Phillips
2001). In contrast, after the horrors of the Holocaust, Hans Jonas (1996) attempted to absolve
God of any blame for evil and suffering, suggesting that God is no longer active in the world –
hence blame falls on humans.33 From the Buddhist perspective, evil is due to human
attachment to a world of impermanent and changing things, including ego (Cobb, 2001;
Varela 1999).34 From a process perspective – if one accepts God as both creator and participant
with the creation’s experiences, providing multiple options for choosing – evil becomes a
potential consequence of the freedom to choose, and to choose badly (Oomen 2015;
Whitehead 1978).35
The Lure of Habits
The material world presents choices too – as an objective lure which is the culmination of the
antecedent actions, and which may include choices not aligned with the best of all possible
worlds (Oomen 2015; Whitehead 1978). The past does not have to be a burden, it can add to
the complexity and depth of awareness in the new moment; but past events also can become
habits and roadblocks – slowing down the creative process of becoming (Cobb Jr. and Griffin
1976; Griffin 2007). The tension of choosing between God’s lure and the world’s lure is
challenging, and this is not an easy concept of God. Being responsible for one’s choices can be
a hard task, as the best choice may be the hardest choice in the short term (Oomen 2015).36
Organizations likewise fall prey to morphic grooves, as habits of process and systems
become ingrained as organizational culture over time, opening a door to potential failure in
growth and relevance.37 At the same time, as David Shaw (2018) notes, an organization’s
structure (habits) also provide a framework within which the processes of change and
adaptation may occur. The goal is to balance the tension between stability and change. The
counter to stagnation and choosing badly lies in developing the wisdom of choosing the best
option (harmonious, balanced, caring…). Shaw (2018) references dualities management,
balancing the either / and of choosing between two good options, for example. This is
reminiscent of Nicolescu’s (2002) transdisciplinarity approach based on choosing from a
perspective of both / and options. An organization’s philosophy of management has a part
33
This idea has been called Bfeeble^ because it limits God’s omnipotence – evil exists because God does not
have the ability to intervene (Clavier 2011, 266).
34
For a presentation of various theodicies and an in-depth analysis of process theodicy, see David R. Griffin’s
God, power, and evil (Griffin 2004; Cobb Jr. and Griffin 1976); as well as Stephen Davis (2001).
35
For Whitehead, ultimate evil is the Bperpetual perishing^ of time (the fading past), and the need to choose
among mutually obstructive things; the need to select and the act of selecting are the measure and evasion of evil
(340).
36
Gasset 1993 described life as the presentation of several paths, and human beings are forced to choose, to
decide from moment to moment; even no decision, abrogating a choice, is a choice.
37
For Dibben (2009), the organization is an Beffect^ of slowing change - more a becoming, than a changing (15).
to play in recognizing the validity of multiple options, and then reinforcing the ability to
choose wisely among the potentially varied, different, complementary and opposing options.
A New Perspective
Of course, it is possible to adopt a positivist position and avoid this discussion altogether by
reducing (deflating) metaphysical speculation to linguistic analysis and verifiability questions
(Thomasson 2015).38 This has been called the error of idealizing the objective (Polanyi 1974).
The balance of subjective and objective, that totality of experience, is lost. Statler and
Salovaara (2017) point out that while some may consider metaphysics to be dead, and while
it is possible to ask if the language games of truth really matter, searching for some kind of
metaphysical truth or understanding can have pragmatic value and can be transformational for
philosophy and for human actions in practice.
The above explorations show an alignment with the idea that God, through creativity,
connection, and process, provides both a spiritual and natural ground (absolute and relative,
primordial and consequent, actual and potential) to human experience. While the chaotic
attractor is a useful dynamic (as novelty and the breaker of habits) for biological systems
process-stuck in a stagnant phase, in reality chaos is usually painful for human beings
(Wheatley 1999). While learning may be challenging, suffering is not required. Organizations
provide a rich learning environment if properly utilized as such on behalf of the human being –
with the possibility for achieving both collective and individual wisdom leading to transfor-
mative change, perhaps in less time and with possibly far less pain.
Praxis Point – Philosophy of Management
The universe is a communion of subjects, not a collection of objects.

- Thomas Berry
A Process Management Framework
A narrow management focus on only one part of the organizational whole will create
imbalance, dysfunction, and potentially failure. Balance is necessary for successful relation-
ships in any fully functioning system (Donaldson 2017; Popper 2004; Senge 1990; Wheatley
1999) Below is a preliminary framework of a process philosophy of management based on the
synthesis of God, creativity, connection and process, grounded by experience.
1. What one focuses on, affects one’s reality – values inspire vision (and so action).
2. Creative participation, collaboration and discovery happen in an open, inclusive and safe
environment – the safe culture.
38
Walter Renner (2015) proposes a Bsoft^ empirical database of religious/spiritual experiences based on specific
criteria to meet verifiability issues. These experiences are subjective and difficult to purposefully replicate, yet it
is possible to collect qualitative data for study through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary methods, including
Buddhist meditation techniques (requiring a willingness to try non-traditional approaches) (Hall 2010; Renner
2015).
3. Actualized possibilities transcend and include that which came before in ongoing adap-
tations – everything changes, learning is required.
4. Parameters, laws, and constants apply; consequences are real; the means affect the ends –
personal responsibility is in effect.
5. Humanity shares a connectivity and knowing with each other and with God – work (and
life) has deep meaning.
Clearly, these principles are interrelated and cross-over is possible and expected in practice;
nothing is separate, everything is connected.39
What One Focuses on, Affects one’s Reality
The Energy of Values in Action
Morality, aesthetics and religion influenced the classical view of values, but the practical
reality is human beings are always being and doing around some set of values; the individual’s
psychological, intellectual and aesthetic center of awareness is in a constant state of evaluating,
valuing and acting upon the final value determination – choosing an option, even if inaction is
the choice (Beck and Cowan 1996; Best 2011; Gasset 1993; Laloux 2014; Schipper 2001;
Walhout 1978; Whitehead 1978). An organization is a diverse group of human beings at
equally diverse psychological development levels, shaped by many factors, including, for
example, individual character, personality preferences, and judgement filters, which in turn,
evolve based on a multitude of other factors, such as: birth time and place, family culture,
religious upbringing, type of education, social order, talents and skill sets; these experiences
and qualities contribute to and shape individual personal values in any given moment, which
may or may not conflict with an organization’s vision, mission and core values, and all of
which influence the being and doing (the work) (Banaji 2016; Beck and Cowan 1996; Nisbett
2003).
Individuals and Organizations - Intersection
Human beings value stability, and in an organization, the systems, processes and procedures
provide stability and structure within which people may work. However, human beings
experience a spiritual need for variety as well – for inspiration, creative opportunities, learning,
expressing talents, the independence of self-authoring (what John Dewey considered the
highest value), and continual change epitomized in growth itself (Cooperrider 1986;
Seligman 2002; Stumpf 1975).
39
In a POM special issue on pragmatism, Bereson and Guillet de Monthoux (2017) suggest pragmatism
challenges the idea of universal principles because the act of doing / choosing leads to knowing based on the
outcomes of the doing / choosing; which is followed by the next interaction of doing and a new outcome (193).
But the idea of inevitable change is in itself a kind of universal - that is, change is a constant, or at the very least,
the potential for change is a constant in human experience. Further, Bordron 2017, suggests the only presuppo-
sition is the confidence in the power of flux (process) – anything can change and be changed (251). The questions
then become: how to manage, how to guide, and how to provide a solid footing for the ever-shifting change
potentiality?
The more complex needs on the individual level lead to autonomous value selection (with
the potential to break free of social / family imposed norms), as well as learning to expand
conscious awareness in a self-authoring manner (Kegan 2000; Varela 1999). The guiding
values of the organization can provide purpose that attracts and resonates with a desire to do
more, be more and contribute more fully (that is, of doing one’s best work), in line with the
individual’s autonomous value selection (Laloux 2014; Ludema 1996; Senge et al. 2004;
Whitney et al. 2010). Developing shared values that account for both the individual and the
organization’s complexity in relationship is challenging but important, as solid organizational
values reflecting creativity (variety of possibilities), appreciation and collaboration (connection
and relatedness of each to all), and process (lifelong learning moving toward greater harmony
and complexity of form and function) will attract and sustain engaged participants.
Proactive Transformation
Ongoing organization reviews to create and sustain shared mission and visions are possible
and advisable. Change need not occur only in times of chaos and disorder. C. Otto
Scharmer (2018) developed a change management process (Theory U), for example, based
on a journey through the stages of awareness – moving through a field of seeing, sensing,
presence, crystallizing and finally co-creating. This process develops greater awareness of
individual’s blind spots – areas in which one is not paying attention – so that a group may
overcome differences and together co-sense, co-presence and co-create the future. Likewise,
David Cooperrider’s (1986) appreciative inquiry is based on a similar model of a collab-
orative process of self-determination: discovering what works within the organization,
including talents and skills of participants; dreaming and envisioning what the future can
be; designing a plan to implement the dream; and destiny – the final actualization of what
came before – implementing change and transforming the organization (Cooperrider, et al.,
2000; Whitney, et al., 2010). Creating in this self-expressive, self-determining manner
channels a connective flow of energy that feels good as the chosen values, vision and
mission are embraced; and contributing with a positive, creative and helpful perspective
equates as good work, that which gives life meaning and fulfillment (Csikszentmihalyi
1996; Gardner et al. 2001).40
Reactive Transformation
What happens when everything falls apart? A public service parks and recreation agency went
through a debilitating workforce strike and management made a constructive choice – start
from scratch and build a shared mission and vision (Allen 2012). Management actively sought
out every employee, asking what was of value for each person in terms of the job and the
organization. From this outreach, management initiated weekly facilitated meetings (lasting
18 months) at which all employees participated in developing a set of guiding values upon
which everyone agreed. The unanimous number one value was to earn the respect of the
people they served in the community, and every operating value was derived from that as the
primary. The impact of that process on the relationships of the employees and management,
and over time, of the organization with the community was transformative (and has lasted
40
This is not to deny that people are dysfunctional (due to varied factors including environmental lack) and so
may not respond to positive opportunities. See also note 46.
decades) – as reciprocal respect, appreciation and trust emerged. When everything falls apart,
there are still good choices and bad choices that can be made in regrouping and rebuilding;
constructive and connective (inclusive) choices may take longer but will build stronger
organizations over time.
Creative Participation, Collaboration, and Discovery Happen in an Open,

Inclusive and Safe Environment
Considerations of Safety
According to positive psychology, three traits have impact on the cohesive functioning of a
group and encourage the desire to contribute: the sense of wellbeing; character strengths; and
community, both social and organizational (Aspinwall and Staudinger 2003; Peterson and
Seligman 2004). Trust in a safe and supportive environment, on every level of an organization,
encourages and reinforces the development of these traits.
Trust and Safety
Trust reflects a Bsense of ontological security^ which is essential on the personal level, but also
on the practical level for functioning within a group, organization and community (Dibben
2004, 26).41 Trust in an organization is an inter-subjective process – a condition that develops
between and among individuals: the trust process involves the individuals’ willingness to trust
and cooperate, based on both a lack of complete knowledge in the moment, and some learned
trust based on past occasions of experience (that is interaction among the organization’s
participants, for example) (Dibben 2004). The kind of environment management develops
may foster or impede trust and a sense of safety; a dynamic and energetic actualization of trust
through cooperative behavior leads to more trust, more creativity, and ultimately a stronger,
more relevant organization (Dibben 2004).
Comfort with Change
Safety does not mean an absence of conflict. A modicum of tension among a group of truly diverse
individuals facing challenges is normal and also healthy from a natural evolutionary and creative
process point of view. Margaret J. Wheatley (1999) refers to this idea as the play of equilibrium /
disequilibrium; Alfonso Montuori (2014) as order / disorder in play – qualities of creative adaptation.
Similar to stagnation and intransigence, equilibrium and order can be deadly, leaving an entity
inflexible and unable to adapt. Comfort with the process of chaos and disorder creating new order is
essential because change is a given in every environment; but how an organization approaches
change will impact people in a dysfunctional or a healthy way (Cooperrider 1986; Heron 1996;
Montuori 2003, 2014; Senge 1990; Wheatley 1999; Whitney et al. 2010).42
41
See Dibben (2004), page 27, note 23 for references and variations on the definition of trust.
42
Robert Waldinger (2015) shares findings from the 75+ year Harvard Study of Adult Development, which
continues to monitor people from the original group to determine what makes a good life. Caring support is
practical well beyond organizational results - holding on to caring relationships helps humans thrive and live to a
ripe old age (Buettner 2012; Seligman 2002; Waldinger 2015).
Change as Destructive
When chaos becomes an organizational management tool, there is no safe culture, no sense of
belonging or of being valued. Schumpeter 2012 outlined the concept of creative destruction as
a process of economic system reset. Destructive would be the operative term – great human
cost is often an outcome of businesses that use destruction as a method to create new systems
with new profits as the main goal. What happens to the affected human beings, the organiza-
tion and the community at large, when balance is ignored, when the process of determining
and choosing has no connection to spirit, to an underlying field of caring and compassion? As
Slavoj Zizek (2009) notes, when everything is analyzed based on cost, everything eventually
has a price – morality, human values, and human suffering are monetized. The cost in human
suffering is considered acceptable, and even necessary. But in reality, organizational change
does not have to be destructive and devaluing to the human being; that is a choice made by
management.43
Change as Constructive
In contrast, consider an environment that develops positive deviants, defined as problem-

solvers who think outside the box and find innovate solutions that others are unable to see (due
to intransigence, fear, inattention, etc.) (Goldstein et al. 2010). They are classified as positive
because the solutions are constructive rather than destructive, and deviant because they break
the organizational mold and use resources in new ways (reminiscent of Schipper’s (2001)
transcendentive creativity, noted earlier and in principle 3 below). The process can begin by
bringing together those affected by a problem, the poor performing dysfunctional department,
for example, and then analyzing the situation to find the outliers, those not affected by the
problem, those who are performing and succeeding. What lessons or clues are discoverable?
This approach is a variant of appreciative inquiry noted above – learn the guiding principles
and practices of the successful, and then disseminate those ideas as new processes, procedures,
and systems (Cooperrider et al. 2000; Goldstein et al. 2010).
Safety in Communication
Dialogue is essential for a safe culture focused on constructive change management. Silence
can be destructive, translating into serious emotional and psychological stress, distrust,
competitiveness, defensiveness, anxiety, anger, resentment, and fear (a de-evolving impulse
leading to anxiety, anger, stagnation – and consequences that are either apathetic and non-
productive or destructive and violent) (Cooperrider 1986, 2001; Hall 2010; Isaacs 1999;
Popper 2004; Rosenberg 2003; Senge 1990; Smith and Berg 1987). This is not the silence
of contemplation and reflection, which can be helpful and rejuvenating to the spirit (a tool
for creativity enhancement). Here the focus is on the destructive misuse of silence.
David Bohm (1996) considered dialogue as multi-faceted as human experiences, and an
exchange of meaning that suffers from social and personal fragmentation (influenced by
differences of culture, geography, education, etc.). Human beings tend to separate things
that are not really separate, and the assumptions that arise from this separation are Bvirus-
43
While this discussion excludes natural disasters, management makes choices reflecting values in dire times
too.
like^ and create breakdowns in understanding and communication, leading to crises.

Mahzarin R. Banaji (2016) refers to these biases as Bmindbugs^, habits of thought that
mislead, affecting perception, memory, thought, decision-making, creativity and more (4).
Sice and French (2004) note that how management perceives language and dialogue can
promote or stifle creativity. Communication is more than transmission of information; it is a
recursive process of mutual orientation and interaction, as individuals respond to each other,
and co-create social systems and cultural agreements. This reciprocal relationship between
human experience and language forms the worlds within which people live and so dialogue
reflects human interaction, co-creation and communication. Learning to dialogue openly and
recognize bias and obstacles to new ideas aids in developing a creatively nurturing
environment.
Systems to Bridge Understanding
Recognizing the value of dialogue, management can choose to develop appropriate support
systems and actively develop practices that include group dialogue, as well as set defini-
tions of terms for dialogue, which if practiced regularly serve to both reveal and clarify the
underlying differences of each person in the group in a way that can strengthen multi-
cultural awareness, increase understanding of the impact of words on relationships, and
ultimately, develop greater creative collaboration within the organization (Barron 1999;
Bohm 1996; Fay 1996; Kegan and Lahey 2001). The Crucial Conversations program is
one example of how to develop practices of proactive group dialogue for problem solving
when the tension of diverse opinions, strong emotions and major goals are involved
(Patterson et al. 2012). This is a program for building safety, incorporating values, sharing
personal stories, and listening to others – creating a path through conflict and distrust.
People also need to know they are being treated fairly, especially while they experience
the trials and errors of iterative learning and creating. Fairness on this level is about
systems and processes which may include, for example: opportunities to learn and fail
without being shamed, demoted and / or fired; meetings for brainstorming and idea
exchanges; methods for submitting suggestions or reporting ethics violations (including
anonymously); team building activities that help employees learn about each other; partic-
ipatory discussions about organization altering decisions with those affected by the deci-
sions, so people feel heard; transparency in the decision-making process by sharing the
why of an outcome; recognition and rewards for individual achievements throughout the
organization; and information on the remuneration process, including implementing a rate
comparable to the average, at the very least, in the specific industry (Allen 2012;
Donaldson 2017; Greenberg 1996; Patterson et al. 2012).
Managing change constructively in an environment of safety and trust that encourages
dialogue provides a foundation for continued creativity and adaptation, which translates as
the ability to adjust course and realign as needed. A nurturing environment understands the
relationship between performance and experiences – quality of performance and quality of
life are directly related (Sice and French 2004). The over-arching goal is a support system
with processes that are balanced – to encourage the kind of individualism that generates
creativity, and to encourage the kind of collaboration which directs individualism toward
cooperation (Shaw 2018).
Actualized Possibilities Transcend and Include that which Came

before in Ongoing Adaptations
Everything Changes, Learning Is Required
While an individual and an organization’s management may refuse to change, in reality, the
world does not stand still to preserve stagnation or the stuck-ness of habit. But the realization
of how inescapable change is, can also trigger resistance and bad choices. How does
management teach openness rather than resistance so change may be constructive and creative
as noted above? Accepting that reflection contributes to transformation and creativity (both
explorative and transcendentive), knowing how to think and reflect critically with an open
mind about rules, processes, ideas, experiences and more may require some training based on
the diversity of participants’ backgrounds (Beck and Cowan 1996; Senge 1990).
Systems for Learning
The organizational learning environment will include programs of training and study that
harness passion and purpose to help direct constructive change. Ideas will vary based on need,
situation and budget. Along with books and travel to traditional didactic lectures, new
technology offers some creative opportunities for adult learners, and may include: flipping
the classroom model so didactic lectures are watched online at home and interactive exercises
based on the lectures are part of group meetings on the job; virtual conferences in which
individuals ‘attend’ the podcast / webcast lectures together in a conference room and / or alone
in one’s office, with interactive Q & A discussion options via chat technologies; required
online training in diversity, harassment, and other personnel issues; and a resource list of
articles, books, pertinent Ted Talks, and other online learning tools for personal and profes-
sional development (Cobb 2013). The foci can be equally varied, including: explorations of
human development; character, ethics, values and organizational vision and mission; and
orientation and training in the various roles, responsibilities, expectations and tasks specific
to departments and domains (including cross-training) (Allen 2012; Cobb 2013; Senge 1990).
However, collective learning is potentially more powerful than solitary learning, as the bias,
blindspots and assumptions underlying individual views are minimized through that influence
of shared perspectives (Banaji 2016; Bohm 1996; Gardner 1985; Haberli et al. 2001).
Learning for Environmental Context
Education is also about placing the organization in context. Not all ideas are good for all
organizations; circumstances, participants, products, and existing framework – these factors
contribute to choosing the (complementary) learning systems and creative outcomes (Schipper
2001). In addition, power structures may promote or limit reflection and creative outcomes.
For example, power can manifest as a highly controlled organization with strict rules of
interaction, which in turn may influence the employee’s subconscious perspective on change,
creativity and innovation, based on how those concepts are perceived to threaten the power
structures in place (Schipper 2001). Management models the role of power through action, not
words, and employees notice.
While both reflection and radical reflection (potential transcendentive creativity) may not be
easy to introduce, it is possible to begin through environmental context reviews. For example,
an organization may hold regular employee meetings that are environmental scans of com-
munity circumstances (looking at local, national and global news, for example), and the
connections that may impact the organization (fiscally, legally, socially, etc.). These discus-
sions can also include in depth reviews of internal and external feedback provided by annual
surveys of employees and customers. The organization may hold regular company-wide
meetings to recognize individual and group achievements in organizational goals (Allen
2012; Senge 1990).
These two processes seem basic, yet they serve multiple functions by: introducing reflection
and learning into the organizational structure in a non-threatening manner; modeling what
achievement looks like, showcasing the much-desired behavior of productive and creative hard
work, for example, which encourages ongoing personal development (who does not want
recognition?); introducing what lifelong learning can look like, by developing awareness of the
impact of the world on the organization (and one’s job – a practical component). In addition,
these practices provide networking opportunities that can leading to supportive mentoring
relationships, teaching opportunities, and both caring and practical systems of positive behav-
ior reinforcement (Allen 2012; Senge 1990; Simon 1983; Whitney et al. 2010).
Learning for Character and Values
Can people learn to appreciate, care and be community oriented? Positive psychology and
neuroscience studies support the sciences of compassionate love, happiness and gratitude –
these emotions have a biological effect on the body and brain, and a positive effect on the
overall creativity and problem-solving ability of an individual in any context (Cannato 2010;
Gerhardt 2004; Hall 2010; Korten 2006; Peterson and Seligman 2004). In addition, Buddhist
meditation studies note the positive impact of meditative compassion states on areas of the
brain that are identified with motivation and action (Hall 2010). The belief that good habits,
skills, character traits and positive values are both necessary and learnable will strengthen an
organization.
Learning for Creativity
Creativity is a consequence of an environment that supports a variety of learning programs.

Foundational learning, however, comes first (for the most part) – developing the skill and
depth of knowledge on a subject that can lead to the creative leap beyond. Training for skill
development to meet position responsibilities is essential, after which creativity manifests as an
iterative process that includes an ongoing method of organizing information and experience,
then disorganizing to reorganize, but with that fresh (creative) perspective (Csikszentmihalyi
1996; Montuori 2003, 2014; Wheatley 1999).44
The Work of Change Management
Creating a learning environment is about managing the given that is change. Positive deviants,
Theory U and Appreciative Inquiry were introduced earlier as methods to develop wisdom in
choosing the constructive vs. destructive path. Many proactive, positive, and constructive
44
Consider also ordinary creativity – creating a life that may seem ordinary (not an artist or inventor), but unique
creativity happens through the expression of a point of view, talents, relationships, and joy in life (Bateson 1999).
approaches are available as a means to manage change.45 But learning and work are required;
commitment, patience, time and effort are required.
Parameters, Laws, and Constants Apply; Consequences Are Real;

the Means Affect the Ends
Operating Principles Are in Effect
Process philosophy does not equate into a soft (as in undisciplined, irresponsible, inconse-
quential) management style of unending positivity. Process is creative and open, and it is also
specific and focused, with rules of action and reaction, cause and effect. In common sense day
to day living, human beings operate as naïve realists – the senses reveal that substance is real,
the chair, table, glass are real – they are seen, held, felt, dropped. However great the mystery
and paradox beneath the surface, the constants of the physical universe still apply.
Nature’s Lessons
At the same time, in this perspective nature’s constants are balanced by the opportunity for
choosing among possibilities, reinforcing human responsibility. Individuals are responsible for
awareness, for learning, and for developing understanding of the operating principles of the
natural world, for survival’s sake if for no other reason. Likewise, organizational codes of
conduct and rules of behavior are important operating principles which individuals need to
learn, and management needs to enforce to sustain the values that support the safe learning
environment.
However, humanity’s choices (and rules of operation) may have decisive purpose, but can
be selfish, destructive, lazy (that lure of habit) or simply ignorant, with no conception of the
bigger picture and how the impacted parts interconnect – hence unbalanced, if not unhinged,
outcomes may result. Humanity’s perspective is at most partial, and therefore it does not
account fully for the complexity and interconnection of life. Smith and Berg (1987) note that
for the most part, human beings operate through bounded rationality – choosing and deciding
based on immediate needs and desires, well outside considerations of the vast scope of
collective interconnectivity. This impacts the quality of judgements and decisions made, and
the choices and actions taken. The ecology of action specifies that no matter the intent of an
action, once it has been realized, the ripples of that choice move outward on a unique path of
unimagined consequences, which sometimes can be negative due to humanity’s partial
understanding (Morin 1992, 2008; Wheatley 1999). Thus, the means (cause) are contained
within the ends (effect) in a relationship of logical necessity (Hartshorne and Reese 1976;
Morin 1992).
The Means Affect the Ends
Organizational learning environments also may need to teach about consequences (both as a
general concept and as specific outcomes). Clearly defined expectations of behavior, usually in
a handbook, might include – dress, courtesy, speech, ethics, punctuality, internet security, cell
45
See for examples, Beck and Cowan 1996; Laloux 2014; Esbjorn-Hargens 2010; and Whitney et al. 2010.
phone use, etc.; and clearly outlined consequences for breaking the rules of behavior, whether
instant dismissal or levels of disciplinary action. But education on consequences also entails
developing necessary values and relationship skills that actively look for and recognize
potential consequences: for example, collaboration, compassion, truthfulness, self-account-
ability, self-awareness, awareness of others, etc. (Murray 2006; Senge 1990; Tamm and Luyet
2004). When management cares, both the resources necessary for learning and a safety net for
failing while learning, are provided. When the individual cares, personal accountability for
both learning and self-transformation are exhibited. In this way, management and the individ-
ual together share in responsibility for the organization’s well-being and relevance to the
community.
The Carrot and the Stick
Acknowledging human intransigence and habit, it is likely that in the beginning, attendance,
participation, and cooperation with learning activities, organizational values and rules of
behavior may be required – a paycheck is a powerful lure as well in the beginning. Some
may never be comfortable with or accept an environment that embraces openness, learning,
personal responsibility, and transformation.46 The desire to change is tied to doing the work of
change – encouraging that desire is about values and meaning making. Management on every
level creates the culture in which people both desire to grow, and can grow, and so fully
actualize their best work.
Humanity Shares a Connectivity and Knowing with each Other

and with God
Meaning - the God of Hope, God of Tragedy
From the spiritual perspective, human beings are more than biology, more than chemical
processes – and the whole is greater than the sum of its parts; there is an embedded
transcendent self-transforming component that when acknowledged and reinforced through
opportunities to learn and create more fully, connects human beings to each other and to the
universe, and the flow of energy that is viewed herein as God in process (Cowan 2010;
Currivan 2017; Laszlo 2016; Whitehead 1978). Understanding the nature of the universe in
this way can permeate what one thinks and does with deep meaning.
The God of creativity, connection and process offers a deeply affecting perspective – in
particular, the idea that God could be said to need human beings as co-creators just as human
beings need God as creator (clearly a difference in degree and kind of need). God realizes
creation through the creatures’ experiences, sharing in human joy and suffering, containing
46
Human beings can be damaged – psychologically dysfunctional, pathological, suffering from every variation
of the seven deadly sins (pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, anger, sloth); influenced by abuse, minimal nurturing,
biased familial and cultural upbringing, etc. Hence the importance (and ultimately the compassion and caring) of
developing support systems, especially for the safe culture and lifelong learning, in every organization.
(preserving) both joyful and tragic outcomes; thus, human choices have a depth of meaning
that is eternal in some sense (Whitehead 1978).47 A quality of hopefulness and anticipation is
natural to this process of continuous new possibilities and choices (Oomen 2015). If the
quantum nature of the universe is infinite potentiality through God, then hope (as a willingness
to learn and create) will outweigh tragedy, as infinite possibilities become that wellspring in the
human heart and consciousness.48
One may choose a different concept of God, and even no God (different discussions); but
the attraction to Whitehead’s conception of God lies at the very least, in two areas. 1) This
concept of God reflects a resonating compatibility, beauty and logic that is not outside the
realm of the natural; it can fit with what one feels and observes – in a coherent world view of
day to day life, spiritual experiences, and science. 2) Accepting some kind of experience of
God respects the validity of religious experiences throughout human history; recognizing the
impact of individual situated-ness – of personal history and the particularity of time, space and
cultural place – the varied descriptions of the religious experience still are about something.49
Separation and Awareness
Why is spiritual connection not more obvious to more people? Bohm (1996) suggested human
beings moved away from that natural state of participatory thought in which boundaries did
not exist and life was about a shared experience of reality between nature and human beings.
The error occurred when the thought of a thing became literal, making it a separate thing,
which then became a new kind of idol worship of the literal – the word alone is God, rather
than the shared reality which the word references (confusing the map with the territory, and
making the error of idealizing (idolizing) objectivity, noted earlier) (Polanyi 1974).
Carolyn J. Love (2015) considers that God’s presence is always everywhere,50 but the
individual experiences God as absent due to unawareness, which in turn is due to life-world
limitations. Awareness develops through a combination of biology, mind, body, brain, cultural
capacity, etc., reflecting the complexity of being a human being in the world with selective
ability for processing everything. Relationship, relationality, relatedness are key – and need to
be present, as all of the parts contribute to the wholeness that becomes an awareness of God,
within and emerging from the human experience (Love 2015).
From another perspective, Francisco Varela (1999) does not say God exists necessarily, but
rather describes the experiences of advanced practitioners of Buddhist meditation, moving
through the layers of human awareness in a progressive process, releasing the ego, facing the
initial depression of impermanence, only to discover beyond / through these layers, on the
other side, so to speak, a sense of a field of unconditional compassion. Is Bauthentic care^ what
lies beyond the non-solidity of the self, and further, might one connect with it through
sustained training (which Varela acknowledges is an alien idea to many in the West) (1999,
73)? This is a beautiful description of something – and perhaps it is a moment of connection to
47
In the classical view God is omniscient and omnipotent; therefore, to view God as still in process and evolving
because the world is, can make God less than (Hosinski 2015). The idea that humanity’s experiences are to be
preserved eternally in God, makes for a tragic God, which Delwin Brown (1999) believes is the appropriate
interpretation of Whitehead – that ultimately both the world and God are tragic. (And what of joy?)
48
Hannah Arendt (1958) finds hopefulness in the process of human natality – new people are born signaling new
beginnings, and the possibility of new actions and new choices.
49
See William James (1958) and Antony Steinbock (2007) for two considerations of spiritual experiences.
50
Thomas Aquinas considered natural love to be present everywhere – soul, body and nature (Hosinski 2015).
this underlying ground of compassionate concern (and infinite possibilities) that manifests as
the varied mystical, religious and spiritual experiences of so many.51
Following Whitehead’s lead, God would not be outside the natural order. God will reflect a logic,
harmony and order, and a connectivity and creativity in process. God is a beautiful paradox, a both /
and, often misused and abused – but as a parent knows through the love for a child, unconditional
love is boundless, always caring, open, hopeful and welcoming. Thus, God is understood herein as a
foundational field of energy, reflecting creativity (being as quantum generosity actualizing the
becoming and experiencing of the universe), process (being as quantum curiosity exploring infinite
possibilities and probabilities of novelty, learning and adapting), and ultimately relatedness (being
that is quantum connection – a caring, holding and sustaining the becoming that is life in a
relationship of compassion). These are transformative concepts at the individual and organizational
level – providing a powerful foundation of meaning that may, and can, energize participants.
Conclusion – Hope-Filled Intersection
BWho Do We Choose to Be?^52
Perspective is powerful; worldviews are confining or transforming. Will human beings learn to
release the need to fit God, science, meaning, and so much more, into narrow and often separate
boxes? If emergent consciousness is connected to all that is at the quantum level (parts and wholes),
then there is the possibility of an embedded connection to God as creative Source within every
energy-event/particle of the human body, and an underlying (or interior) connection to every particle
of every pattern, form and function that comprise the universe, however simple or complex the
entities, or distant the relationships. The path to interior awareness of this connection (a kind of
transcendence) is not limited – it is as varied as the possibilities of human expression, which are
vastly varied.53
As touched on here, a philosophy of management may incorporate multiple truths of human
experience (science and spirituality) that complement and reinforce each other, and so instill human
beings with a firm (yet naturally ever-changing) foundation of meaning from which to grow as
positive (creative and constructive) change agents. But both personal and organizational responsi-
bility are intrinsic to this outlook – it requires consciously purposeful work from participants to
bridge what Scharmer (2018) calls the great ecological, social and spiritual divides that humanity
faces.
A God oriented process philosophy of management strikes a balance that is both practical and
spiritual. With God as source, humanity connects to the deeper meaning of life experiences; meaning
influences values and vision; vision energizes creativity, production and performance, connecting
consciousness to the everlasting creative energy flow that is transformative becoming; and in that
connection we (re)connect to God – that praxis point of meaning, management and work.
51
Some intriguing questions: if one considers consciousness solely the result of the human brain’s biological and
neurological complexity – to what does the complexity of the universe as a whole give rise? Supra-conscious-
ness? Is the neural complexity that creates consciousness, a mirror for the universe’s complexity: the natural laws,
galaxies, black holes, super novae, and dark space (Currivan 2017)?
52
Margaret Wheatley (2017) asks this pointed question, BWho do we choose to be?^ in an urgent call for every
human being to take on a transformative leadership role within every situation and relationship.
53
Many beautiful spiritual perspectives on the nature of God, and related ideas, are available; see for example,
Beatrice Bruteau 2001; Cobb Jr. 2007; Catherine Keller 2008; and Ken Wilber 2006, 2017.
Acknowledgements Thank you to the reviewers of this article for the generous guidance and additional
sources.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
References
Allen, M.D. 2012. An integral-appreciative co-paradigm study of leadership and effectiveness at a public service
agency: The Rockford Park district from 1972–2006, 3548057. Ann Arbor: UMI Dissertation Publishing.
Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The human condition. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Aspinwall, L.G., and U.M. Staudinger. 2003. A psychology of human strengths: Some central issues of an
emerging field. In A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a
positive psychology, ed. L. Aspinwall and U.M. Staudinger, 9–22. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Banaji, M.R. 2016. Blindspot: Hidden biases of good people. New York: Bantam Books.
Barron, F. 1999. All creation is a collaboration. In Social creativity, ed. A. Montuori and R. Purser, vol. 1, 49–59.
Cresskill: Hampton Press.
Bateson, M. C. (1999). Ordinary creativity. In A. Montuori & R. Purser, Social Creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 153–171).
Cresskill: Hampton Press.
Beck, D.E., and C.C. Cowan. 1996. Spiral dynamics: Mastering values, leadership, and change. Malden:
Blackwell Business.
Bereson, R., and P. Guillet de Monthoux. 2017. Special issue editorial: Poetic pragmatism and artful manage-
ment. Philosophy of Management 16: 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-017-0066-x.
Best, K.C. 2011. Holistic leadership: A model for leader-member engagement and development. Journal of
Values-Based Leadership 4 (1): 54–72 Retrieved from http://www.valuesbasedleadershipjournal.
com/issues/vol4issue1/holistic_leadership.php.
Bohm, D. 1996. On dialogue. New York: Routledge Classics.
Bordron, J. 2017. Pragmatism and aesthetic innovation – Thoughts on the nature of change. Philosophy of
Management 16: 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/x40926-017-0074-x.
Braud, W. 1997. The ley and the labyrinth: Universalistic and particularistic approaches to knowing. Working
paper 1997–1. Palo Alto: William James Center for Consciousness Studies, Institute of Transpersonal
Psychology Retrieved from: http://www.inclusivepsychology.com/uploads/LeyAndLabyrinth.pdf.
Brown, D. 1999. Knowing the mystery of god. In Interpreting Neville, ed. J. Harley Chapman and Nancy K.
Frankenberry. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Bruteau, B. 2001. The grand option: Personal transformation and a new creation. Notre Dame: University of
Notre Dame.
Buettner, D. 2012. The blue zones: 9 lessons for living longer from the people who’ve lived the longest.
Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.
Cannato, J. 2010. Field of compassion: How the new cosmology is transforming spiritual life. Notre Dame: Sorin
Books.
Clavier, P. 2011. Hans Jonas’ feeble theodicy: How on earth could god retire? European Journal for Philosophy
of Religion 3 (2): 305–322. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v3i2.398 Retrieved: https://philpapers.
org/rec/CLAHJF.
Cobb, J. 2013. Leading the learning revolution: The expert’s guide to capitalizing on the exploding lifelong
education market. New York: American Management Association.
Cobb, J.B., Jr. 2001. The problem of evil and the task of ministry. In Encountering evil: Live options in theodicy,
ed. Stephen Davis, 181–190. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Cobb, J.B., Jr. 2007. A Christian natural theology: Based on the thought of Alfred north whitehead. Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press.
Cobb, J.B., Jr., and D.R. Griffin. 1976. Process theology: An introductory exposition. Louisville: Westminster
John Knox Press.
Combs, A. 2002. The radiance of being: Understanding the grand integral vision; living the integral life. 2nd ed.
St. Paul: Paragon House.
Combs, A. 2009. Consciousness explained better: Towards an integral understanding of the multifaceted nature
ofr consciousness. St. Paul: Paragon House.
Combs, A., and S. Krippner. 2003. Process, structure and form: An evolutionary transpersonal psychology of
consciousness. The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 22: 47–60 Retrieved from http://www.
paricenter.com/library/download/combs03.pdf.
Cooperrider, D. L. (1986). Appreciative inquiry: Toward a methodology for understanding and enhancing
organizational innovation (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses data-
base. (UMI No. 8611485).
Cooperrider, D.L. 2001. Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In Appreciative
inquiry: Rethinking human organization toward a positive theory of change, ed. D.L. Cooperrider, P.F.
Sorensen Jr., D. Whitney, and T.F. Yaeger, 29–54. Champaign: Stipes.
Cooperrider, D.L., P.F. Sorensen Jr., D. Whitney, and T.F. Yaeger, eds. 2000. Introduction. In appreciative
inquiry: Rethinking human organization toward a positive theory of change, vi–vii. Champaign: Stipes.
Corkery, M. (2016). Wells fargo fined $185 million for fraudulently opening accounts, New York Times.
Retrieved: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/business/dealbook/wells-fargo-fined-for-years-of-harm-to-
customers.html
Cowan, D.A. 2010. Embedded spirituality as a leadership foundation for sustainable innovative learning.
ReVision 30 (3 & 4): 89–97.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1996. Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper
Collins.
Currivan, J. 2017. The cosmic hologram: In-formation at the center of creation. Rochester: Inner Traditions.
Davis, S.T., ed. 2001. Encountering evil: Live options in theodicy. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Dibben, M.R. 2004. Exploring the processual nature of trust and cooperation in organisations: A Whiteheadian
analysis. Philosophy of Management 4 (1): 25–39.
Dibben, M.R. 2009. Organisations and organising. Understanding and applying Whitehead’s processual account
Philosophy of Management 7 (2): 13–24.
Dibben, M.R. 2010. Editorial: Humbug, Ba and human experience. Philosophy of Management 9 (2): 1–6.
Donaldson, W. 2017. Simple complexity - a management book for the rest of us: A guide to systems thinking.
New York: Morgan James Publishing.
Douglas, M. 2001. Dealing with uncertainty. Ethical Perspectives 8 (3): 145–156.
Egan, Matt. (2018). Band of America ‘systematically’ misled clients about stock trades, CNN Money. March 23,
2018. Retrieved: http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/23/investing/bank-of-america-settlement-ny-attorney-
general/index.html
Epperson, M. 2004. Quantum mechanics and the philosophy of Alfred north whitehead. New York: Fordham
University Press.
Esbjorn-Hargens, S. 2010. Integral theory in action: Applied, theoretical, and constructive perspectives on the
AQAL model. Albany: State University of New York (Suny) Press.
Fay, B. 1996. Contemporary philosophy of social science: A multicultural approach. Malden: Blackwell.
Floridi, Luciano. 2011. The philosophy of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frank, A. 1993. Anne frank: The diary of a young girl (B. M. Mooyaart, trans.). New York: Bantam Book /
Doubleday (Original work published in 1952.).
Frankenberry, N.K. 1987. Religion and radical empiricism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Frankl, V.E. 2006. Man’s search for meaning (I. Lasch, trans.). Boston: Beacon Press (Original work published
in 1959.).
Gardner, H. 1985. Frames of mind: A theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., M. Csikszentmihalyi, and W. Damon. 2001. Good work: When excellence and ethics meet. New
York: Basic Books.
Gasset, J.O. 1993. The revolt of the masses. Reissued ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc (Original
work published in 1932.).
Gebser, J. 1986. The ever-present origin (N. Barstand & a. Mickunas, trans.). Athens: Ohio University Press
(Original work published in 1949.).
Geher, G. (2018). Mental health and school shootings, Psychology Today. February 15, 2018. Retrieved:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/201802/mental-health-and-school-
shootings
Gerhardt, S. 2004. Why love matters: How affection shapes a baby’s brain. New York: Brunner-Routledge.
Godwin, R.W. 2004. One cosmos under god: The unification of matter, life, mind and spirit. St. Paul: Paragon
House.
Goldstein, J., J.K. Hazy, and B.B. Lichtenstein. 2010. Complexity and the nexus of leadership: Leveraging
nonlinear science to create ecologies of innovation. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Greenberg, J. 1996. The quest for justice on the job: Essays and experiments. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications,
Inc..
Griffin, D.R. 2000. Religion and scientific naturalism: Overcoming the conflicts. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
Griffin, D.R. 2004. God, power, and evil: A process theodicy. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press (Original
work published in 1976.).
Griffin, D.R. 2007. Whitehead’s radically different postmodern philosophy: An argument for its contemporary
relevance. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Griffin, D.R. 2014. Panentheism and scientific naturalism: Rethinking evil, morality, religious expiereince,
religious pluralism, and the academic study of religion. Claremont: Process Century Press.
Grossman, D., and G. DeGaetano. 2014. Stop teaching our kids to kill: A call to action against tv, movie and
video game violence. revised and updated ed. New York: Harmony Books.
Haberli, R., A. Bill, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, J.T. Klein, R. Scholz, and M. Welti. 2001. Synthesis. In
Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology, and society, ed. J.T. Klein, W.
Grossenbacher-Mansuy, R. Haberli, A. Bill, R.W. Scholz, and M. Welti, 6–22. Basel: Birkhauser Verlag.
Hall, S.S. 2010. Wisdom: From philosophy to neuroscience. New York: Vintage Books.
Hartshorne, C. 1964. The divine relativity: A social conception of god. New Haven: Yale University Press
(Originally published in 1948.).
Hartshorne, C., and W.L. Reese. 1976. Philosophers speak of god. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
(Original work published in 1953.).
Haugen, G.A. 2008. Just courage. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.
Havel, V. (1994). The need for transcendence in the postmodern world. Speech made at Independence Hall,
Philadelphia, on July 4. 1994. Retrieved: http://www.worldtrans.org/whole/havelspeech.html. Also available
at: https://hiddencityphila.org/2011/12/vaclav-havel-at-independence-hall/
Heron, J. 1996. Co-operative inquiry: Research into the human condition. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hosinski, T.E. 2015. Thomas Aquinas and Alfred north whitehead on God’s action in the world. Open Theology
1: 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2015-0012.
IJM International Justice Mission. (2017). Forced labor slavery: The facts. Retrieved from https://www.ijm.
org/casework/forced-labor-slavery
Ilibagiza, I., and S. Erwin. 2014. Left to tell: Discovering god amidst the Rwandan holocaust. Carlsbad: Hay
House, Inc..
Isaacs, W. 1999. Dialogue and the art of thinking together. New York: Currency Doubleday.
James, W. 1958. The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. New York: New American
Library.
Jonas, H. 1996. Mortality and morality: A search for the good after Auschwitz. Evanston: Northwestern
University Press.
Kegan, R. 2000. What form transforms? A constructive-developmental perspective on transformational learning.
In Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives of a theory-in-progress, ed. J. Mezirow, 35–69. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kegan, R., and L. Lahey. 2001. How the way we talk can change the way we work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Keller, C. 2008. On the mystery: Discerning divinity in process. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Kolbert, E. 2014. The sixth extinction: An unnatural history. New York: Henry Holt & Company, LLC.
Korten, D. 2006. The great turning: From empire to earth community. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Laloux, F. 2014. Reinventing organizations: A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next stage of
human consciousness. Brussels: Nelson Parker.
Laszlo, E. 2016. What is reality? The new map of cosmos and consciousness. New York: SelectBooks, Inc..
Laufer, R. 2017. Uncertainty, art and marketing – Searching for the invisible hand. Philosophy of Management
16: 217–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/x40926-017-0063-0.
Levine, M. (2016). Wells fargo opened a couple million fake accounts, Bloomberg View. September 9, 2016.
Retrieved: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-09/wells-fargo-opened-a-couple-million-
fake-accounts
Long, C and Hays, T. (2018). ‘Pharma bro’ gets 7 years in prison in securities fraud case, ABC News. March 9,
2018. Retrieved: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/pharma-bro-faces-high-stakes-sentencing-fraud-
case-53628027
Love, C.J. 2015. God, genetics, and event phenomenology. Open Theology 1: 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1515
/opth-2015-0024.
Ludema, J.D. 1996. Narrative inquiry: Collective storytelling as a source of hope, knowledge, and action in
organizational life, 9720431. Ann Arbor: UMI Dissertation Publishing.
McIntosh, S. 2007. Integral consciousness and the future of evolution: How the integral worldview is
transforming poliitcs, culture and sprituality. St. Paul: Paragon House.
Montuori, A. 2003. The complexity of improvisiation and the improvisation of complexity: Social science, art
and creativity. Human Relations 56 (2): 237–255.
Montuori, A. 2014. A clash of mentalities: Uncertainty, creativity, and complexity in a time of crisis.
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s 95 (2) : 1 79– 19 8 R et rie ve d: htt ps:/ /www.a c ade mi a.e du /23 706 819 /
A_Clash_of_Mentalities_Uncertainty_Creativity_and_Complexity_in_Times_of_Upheaval.
Morin, E. 1992. Method: Towards a study of humankind: Vol. 1. The nature of nature (J. L. R. Belanger, trans.).
New York: Peter Lang.
Morin, E. 2008. On complexity: Advances in systems theory, complexity, and the human sciences. Cresskill:
Hampton Press.
Moskowitz, C. (2017) BThe neutrino puzzle^, Scientific American, October 2017, 32–39.
Murray, T. (2006). Collaborative knowledge building and integral theory: On perspectives, uncertainty and
mutual regard. Integral Review 2, 210–268.Retrieved from http://www.integralworld.net/murray.html
NBER - National Bureau of Economic Research. (2018). Randomizing religion: The impact of protestant
evangelism on economic outcomes. NBER Working Paper Series. February 2018. Retrieved: http://www.
nber.org/papers/w24278.pdf
Nicolescu, B. 2002. Manifesto of transdisciplinarity (K.-C. Voss, trans.). New York: State University of New
York Press.
Nisbett, R.E. 2003. The geography of thought: How Asians and westerners think differently…and why. New
York: The Free Press.
Olsen, P.I. 2011. The relevance and applicability of process metaphysics to organizational research. Philosophy of
Management 10 (2): 53–74.
Oomen, P.M.F. 2015. God’s power and almightiness in Whitehead’s thought. Open Theology 1: 277–292. De
Gruyter Open. https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2015-0013.
Patterson, K., J. Grenny, R. McMillan, and A. Switzler. 2012. Crucial conversations: Tools for talking when
stakes are high. New York: McGraw Hill.
Peterson, C., and M.E.P. Seligman. 2004. Introduction to a Bmanual of the sanities.^ in character strengths and
virtues: A handbook and classification, 3–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, D.Z. 2001. Theism without theodicy. In Encountering evil: Live options in theodicy, ed. Stephen Davis,
145–161. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Plotinus. 1986. Plotinus, the six enneads. In Great books of the Western world series, ed. S. MacKenna and B. S.
Page, Trans. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.
Polanyi, M. 1974. Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press (Original work published in 1958.).
Popper, M. 2004. Leadership as relationship. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 34 (2): 107–125.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8308.2004.00238.x.
Renner, W. 2015. Self-evident experience: A challenge to the empirical study of religion. Open Theology 1: 407–
414. https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2015-0023.
Rescher, N. 1996. Process metaphysics: An introduction to process philosophy. Albany: State University of New
York Press.
Rice, D. (2018). Drugs, alcohol and suicides contribute to alarming drop in U.S. life expectancy, USA Today,
February 6, 2018. Retrieved: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2018/02/07/drugs-alcohol-and-
suicides-contribute-alarming-drop-u-s-life-expectancy/316271002/
Rosenberg, M. 2003. Nonviolent communication: A language of life. Encinitas: Puddle Dancer Press.
Rosenblum, B., and F. Kuttner. 2011. Quantum enigma: Physics encounters consciousness. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sardello, R.J. 1992. Facing the world with soul: The reimagination of modern life. Hudson: Lindisfarne Press.
Scharmer, C.O. 2018. The essentials of theory u: Core principles and applications. Oakland: Berrett-Koehler
Publishers, Inc..
Schipper, F. 2001. Creativity and rationality: A philosophical contribution. Philosophy of Management 1 (2): 3–
15.
Schumpeter, J. A. (2012). Capitalism, socialism and democracy, eBook, 2nd edition. Start Publishing LLC.
(Original work published in 1942.)
SEC - U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. (2018) Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President
Balwani Charged with Massive Fraud, SEC. Press Release March 14, 2018. Retrieved: https://www.sec.
gov/news/press-release/2018-41
Seligman, M. 2002. Authentic happiness. New York: Free Press.
Senge, P.M. 1990. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency
Doubleday.
Senge, P.M., C.O. Scharmer, J. Jaworski, and B.S. Flowers. 2004. Presence: Human purpose and the field of the
future. Cambridge: Society for Organizational Learning.
Shaw, D. (2018) On misunderstanding - Heraclitus: the justice of organisation structure. Philosophy of
Management 1–11. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-018-0097-y.
Sheldrake, R. 2009. Morphic resonance: The nature of formative causation. 4th ed. Rochester: Park Street Press.
Sheldrake, R., T. McKenna, and R. Abraham. 2001. Chaos, creativity, and cosmic consciousness. Rochester:
Park Street Press.
Sice, P & French, I. (2004). Understanding humans and organisations: Philosophical implications of autopoiesis.
Philosophy of Management 4(1).
Simard, S. (2016). How trees talk to each other. TED Talk: Ideas worth spreading. Transcript Available online.
Recorded June 2016. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/suzanne_simard_how_trees_talk_to_each_
other/transcript?language=en
Simon, H. 1983. Reason in human affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Smith, K.K., and D.N. Berg. 1987. Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis, and movement in
group dynamics. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stack, S. (2018). Why suicide is on the rise in the US – even as it falls in Europe. The Conversation. Retrieved:
https://theconversation.com/why-is-suicide-on-the-rise-in-the-us-but-falling-in-most-of-europe-98366.
Statler, M., and P. Salovaara. 2017. Pragmatic truths in organization studies. Philosophy of Management 16: 265–
278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s400926-017-0068-8.
Steinbock, A.J. 2007. Phenomenology and mysticism: The verticality of religious experience. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Stumpf, S.E. 1975. Socrates to Sartre: A history of philosophy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Talbot, M. 1991. The holographic universe: A remarkable new theory of reality. New York: Harper Collins.
Tamm, J.W., and R.J. Luyet. 2004. Radical collaboration. New York: HarperCollins.
Thomasson, A.L. 2015. Ontology made easy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Turner, E. A. (2018). School shootings and youth mental health. Psychology Today. March 23, 2018. Retrieved:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-race-good-health/201803/school-shootings-and-youth-
mental-health
Varela, F. 1999. Ethical know-how: Action, wisdom, and cognition. Transl. Board of Trustees of the Leland
Stanford Junior University. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Waldinger, R. (2015). The good life. TEDx Talks. Published Nov. 30, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=q-7zAkwAOYg
Walhout, D. 1978. The good and the realm of values. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Wheatley, M.J. 1999. Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler.
Wheatley, M.J. 2017. Who do we choose to be? Facing reality claiming leadership restoring sanity. Oakland:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc..
Whitehead, A.N. 1960. Religion in the making. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company (Original work
published in 1926.).
Whitehead, A.N. 1978. Process and reality. New York: Free Press (Original work published in 1929.).
Whitehead, A.N. 1997. Science and the modern world. New York: The Free Press (Original work published in
1925.).
Whitney, D., A. Trosten-Bloom, and K. Rader. 2010. Appreciative leadership: Focus on what works to drive
winning performance and build a thriving organization. New York: McGraw Hill.
Wilber, K. 2000. Integral psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy. Boston: Shambhala.
Wilber, K. 2006. Integral spirituality: A startling new role for religion in the modern and postmodern world.
Boston: Shambhala.
Wilber, K. 2017. The religion of tomorrow: A vision for the future of the great traditions. Boulder: Shambhala.
Wohlleben, P. 2015. The hidden life of trees: What they feel, how they communicate. Vancouver: Greystone
Books.
Woolf, S. 2018. Failing health of the United States. BMJ 360: k496. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k496.
Zizek, S. 2009. First as tragedy, then as farce. London: Verso.
Dr. Margaret DiMarco Allen is the Director of Operations and Continuing Education Administrator for the
Illinois Council of Health-System Pharmacists (ICHP). Dr. Allen completed her PhD in the philosophy of
Transformative Learning and Change, and is interested in all aspects of adult learning and transformation. Dr.
Allen wrote an education module on continuing professional development for pharmacy technicians which was
accredited for continuing education, published by ICHP and sold nationally, and also serves as co-chair of the
Health Care Education Organizations Member Section for the Alliance for Continuing Education in the
Healthcare Professions. In addition, Dr. Allen has made presentations on professional development and best
practices in continuing education, and writes a Career Center blog for ICHP. Dr. Allen has served as a community
volunteer on a variety of projects, the most recent for the grass roots organization, Transform Rockford, which is
working toward community transformation and revitalization. Dr. Allen is currently co-authoring a book on
leadership with a community leader and a journalist.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner.
Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Referensi 5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Referensi 5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philosophy of Management (2019) 18:303–330

God, Ontology and Management: A Philosophical Praxis

Margaret R. DiMarco Allen 1

Published online: 5 October 2018

Keywords Connection . Consciousness . Creativity . God . Management . Process

Stating the Problem

* Margaret R. DiMarco Allen

Reframing the Problem

A Speculative Synthesis Is Proposed

World Shifting Paradigm – Creativity, Connection and Process

Preliminary Thoughts on a New Worldview

The speculative philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead was influenced by developments in

An Optional Historical Pause

God as Source of Creativity

Connection – The Relatedness of the Universe

Process – Energy, Becoming and Transformation

Consciousness and Process

The Lure of Habits

Praxis Point – Philosophy of Management

The universe is a communion of subjects, not a collection of objects.

A Process Management Framework

What One Focuses on, Affects one’s Reality

The Energy of Values in Action

Individuals and Organizations - Intersection

Creative Participation, Collaboration, and Discovery Happen in an Open,

Trust and Safety

Comfort with Change

In contrast, consider an environment that develops positive deviants, defined as problem-

like^ and create breakdowns in understanding and communication, leading to crises.

Systems to Bridge Understanding

Actualized Possibilities Transcend and Include that which Came

Everything Changes, Learning Is Required

Systems for Learning

Learning for Environmental Context

Learning for Character and Values

Learning for Creativity

Creativity is a consequence of an environment that supports a variety of learning programs.

The Work of Change Management

Parameters, Laws, and Constants Apply; Consequences Are Real;

Operating Principles Are in Effect

The Means Affect the Ends

The Carrot and the Stick

Humanity Shares a Connectivity and Knowing with each Other

Meaning - the God of Hope, God of Tragedy

Separation and Awareness

Conclusion – Hope-Filled Intersection

BWho Do We Choose to Be?^52

Compliance with Ethical Standards

You might also like