Talk:Organisational resilience with mindfulness

Josef: Hello, thank you for an interesting proposal. I really like the idea. Please make sure to go back to the original literature (e.g. Weick, see our whitepaper), and also follow the "Method" structure we propose. Also please make sure that you do not end up writing about "organizational resilience" in general, but making projects more resilient.

Comments from the author is written in Italic Review 1, s150621

• Interesting topic Thank you. It turned out to be quite a tricky topic. I hope you like the result

• Nice that you give a description of the content of the article in the abstract The abstract is deleted in the final article

• The table with the 5 principles is clear and straight forward, good with examples for each principle More examples have been implemented in general for better understanding of the topic. Not only in this table but throughout the article

• The abstract should be before the contents The abstract is deleted in the final article

• Some of the sentences could be written easier, or described better, as for example this sentence: “Thorough management is crucial in resilient organisations (check ref, Geraldi et al, 2009) and mindfulness encompass the risk of the human mind.”

• In the article you refer to many books, which is very good. The reference should consistently be done in wiki style, with footnotes. One example is the sentence; “Weick and Sutcliffe(2001) describe mindfulness as “a rich awareness of discrimatory detail”.”, where you don´t use the footnote reference style Good point - All references have been made in wiki-style with footnotes.

• It is nice that the article includes figures, but remember text for describing the figures, and to add the source of the figure Figure text have been added and sources added where possible

• The application paragraph ends with a question, which I suggest rather to put into the discussion. Some alternatives for the answer of the question would also be nice to add to the discussion. I agree - That sentence had to be rephrased. Which have been done.

• Can see that you are not finished yet, but so far it looks interesting, and I look forward to read the rest when you are finished Thank you - Now it is done

Review of Sorth90 (Rasmus Sorth-Olsen s117422), Reviewer 2

• The feedback was given on Tuesday 22-09-2015 at 5 PM.
• The article is not finalized.

True. I apolagize for the incomplete article You had for review.

• Several sections are not written.

True

• It would have been an advantage if the article had described what “Organisational resilience with mindfulness” is and how the tools are applied and why. It would have made it easier for the reader to get an overview and at the same time find the information the reader is looking for.

I hope the article give you these answers now. Unfortunately there is not any tools in mindfulness because it is a management theory or a mind-set. To keep it somehow practical I have given some processes which can be followed by project managers to implement mindfulness. It should be noted that all processes must be fitted to the project to work sucessfully.

Abstract:

• From the abstract, the article seems interesting.

Thank you

• Who is seeking sociotechnical?

I do not understand the question

Big idea:

• Good language.
• Good use of sources.
• What section tell the reader?

The big idea have been converted to the section "Overview" which I found as a more genuine wikipedia section title

5 Principles:

• References.

References is given as (Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001)

• Lacking a description of the figure.

Description is added for all figures

• Good shape. The figure is not complete.

The figure has been remodeled in PowerPoint to get a crisp graphic which fit to the other figures in the article.

Application:

• Using an example. Thus the reader understand better the section.

Examples are included throughout the article. A seperate wikipage have been created with a continous example of how the five principles fit into the processes of a US Navy carrier.

• More in-depth description of Butler & Gray.

Butler & Gray have been kept on a minimal level to maintain focus on Weick & Sutcliffe.

• Do you have a reference for the figure?

Yes, the reference have been added.

• The rest of the article is missing, to be written.

True

Reviewed by s152093, review 3

• I know that the article isn’t done, but here are a few comments.

Thank you for taking your time even though it's not even close to be finish.

• Since you talk a lot about cognitive biases and resilience I think it would make sense to introduce the terms.

The terms are now linked to wikipedia pages with the topics. I recon this is the way people do it on this platform.

• The language is clear and there is a natural flow.

Thanks

• It would be nice to see examples of fields where mindfulness would be very useful, and fields where it wouldn’t make sense to apply the techniques.

I argue that mindfulness is useful in all fields, also fields where failures doesn't result in severe casualties. I can follow your point that there must be some fields where it cannot make any difference, but in some version I think it is relevant everywhere. All sectors/fields experience unexpected events and have to react to these.

• Don’t forget to make the annotated bibliography where you write about each reference.

Thanks - Its done

• The table gives a quick and clear overview.

Great - That is exactly my intention. I hope I have kept the clear overview even though I have added extra examples.

• The picture is nice, but don’t forget to include it in the text.

All pictures are included in text by direct reference.

• In general a really good idea. I’m looking forward to read the final version of the article :-)

Thank you. I hope you like the result. :-)