POWERED BY COMPASSION: THE EFFECT OF LOVING-KINDNESS MEDITATION ON ENTREPRENEURS’ ENVIRONMENTALLY ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
Nick Steiner
Master Thesis MSc in Entrepreneurship & Innovation University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam Business School Supervisor: Dr. Y. (Yuval) Engel
Submitted by: Nick Steiner Student number: 11159278
E-mail Address: nick.steiner@outlook.com
“Our task must be to free ourselves...by widening
our circle of compassion to embrace all living
creatures and the whole of nature and its beauty.”
Albert Einstein
This document is written by Student [Nick Steiner] who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document. I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Table Of Contents
Abstract ... 4
Introduction ... 5
Theoretical Background ... 7
Reframing Sustainability ... 7
Loving-Kindness Meditation And Environmentally Ethical Decision Making ... 9
The Mediating Role Of Compassion ... 12
Method ... 16
Sample ... 16
Procedure And Conditions ... 17
Measures ... 18 Results ... 20 Preliminary Analysis ... 20 Manipulation Check ... 22 Main Effect ... 22 Mediation Analysis ... 23 Discussion ... 26 Theoretical Contribution ... 27 Practical Implications ... 28
Limitations And Future Outlook ... 30
Conclusion ... 33
References ... 34
ABSTRACT
As environmental degradation and climate change continue to threaten our livelihood on the planet, businesses are required to search for ways to decrease their ecological footprint and act more sustainably. Recent advances in the study of entrepreneurship highlights the role of compassion in entrepreneurial decisions involving an ethical balancing act between environmentally sustainable behavior and concerns for economic viability. Building on emerging evidence in psychology, which point to meditative practices as a powerful source of compassion, the current study experimentally tests whether a brief meditation intervention can increase entrepreneurs’ ethical decision-making via elevated compassion. The results of a randomized experiment show that, in contrast to an active control group, entrepreneurs who followed a short guided meditation were more likely to act in an ecologically sustainable manner when facing a decision demanding them to tradeoff environmental and business responsibilities. As predicted, this relationship was mediated by an increase in compassion.
Keywords: Sustainable Entrepreneurship, Loving-Kindness Meditation; Compassion, Environmentally Ethical Decision Making
INTRODUCTION
With the environment under constant distress and the accelerating threat of climate change, corporations and start-ups alike are increasingly looking for ways to decrease their ecological footprint and adopt more sustainable business practices (Bansal & DesJardine, 2014; Parrish, 2010). Accordingly, research into Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainable Entrepreneurship, and Environmental Entrepreneurship is rapidly growing (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Certo & Miller, 2008; Cohen & Winn, 2007; Duong & Pandey, 2014; Kates, Parris, & Leiserowitz, 2005; Lefebvre & Lefebvre, 2012; Pinnell, 2008; Seyfang, 2006; Shepherd & Patzelt, 2011; Tapia-Fonllem, Corral-Verdugo, Fraijo-Sing, & Durón-Ramos, 2013) and the conversation begins to expand with questions about the psychological basis of entrepreneurial decisions involving seemingly competing demands to use both commercial and ecological logics for value creation (Afuah, Allan, Tucci, 2012; Arend, 2013; Bloom & Smith, 2010; Miller, Grimes, Mcmullen, & Vogus, 2012; Porter & Kramer, 2006; York, O’Neil, & Sarasvathy, 2016). Recently, the concept of compassion – a prosocial emotion that produces sensitivity to the pain and needs of others – has been proposed as a key driver of ethical entrepreneurial decisions involving a balancing act between addressing social and environmental problems and the obligation for economic efficiency and profits (Afuah, Allan, Tucci, 2012; Arend, 2013; Miller et al., 2012; York et al., 2016). While it is indisputable that studying the antecedents of environmentally ethical decisions is a worthy quest, and that compassion may be key for such investigations, it is not yet clear how to cultivate compassion in the context of entrepreneurial decisions. In other words, how can entrepreneurs become more compassionate and whether elevated compassion may result in entrepreneurs making environmentally ethical decisions?
The goal of the current study is to provide an answer to these questions by drawing on emerging evidence in psychology suggesting that meditative practices are powerful tools engendering prosocial behavior, compassion, and ethical decision (Boellinghaus, Jones, & Hutton, 2014; Ericson, Kjønstad, & Barstad, 2014; Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, & Finkel, 2008; Jazaieri et al., 2013; Kemeny et al., 2012; Ruedy & Schweitzer, 2010; Weng et al., 2013). Indeed, meditation and mindfulness, core elements of Buddhist spiritual practice, have also seen a surge of interest from researchers examining topics such as
attention, cognition, emotions, behavior, and physiology (Ding et al., 2015; Good et al., 2015; Lane, Seskevich, & Pieper, 2007; Lutz, Slagter, Dunne, & Davidson, 2008; Moore & Malinowski, 2009; Tang et al., 2007). In fact, a wealth of empirical evidence points to the broadly positive impact of meditation on human functioning (see Good et al., 2015 for a recent review). In particular, Loving-Kindness Meditation (LKM) – a contemplative practice that focuses on self-generating feelings of love, compassion, and goodwill toward oneself and others, has been shown to be effective in producing and maintaining compassionate emotional states (Hofmann, Grossman, & Hinton, 2011; Hutcherson, Seppala, & Gross, 2008; Logie & Frewen, 2015; Seppala, Hutcherson, Nguyen, Doty, & Gross, 2014; Shahar et al., 2015) .
We therefore hypothesize a model in which entrepreneurs who follow a brief LKM intervention would show an increased level of compassion and would therefore make environmentally ethical decision when encountering a business scenario involving a trade-off between commercial and ecological goals. To test our hypotheses, we designed an experiment in which participants, real entrepreneurs from a variety of backgrounds, were randomly assigned to either listen to a brief guided LKM (treatment group), or to a recorded lecture about meditation (active control group) and then be exposed to a situation confronting them with a realistic business problem. In addition, participants’ compassion was also assessed to examine its intervening role.
Our research seeks to contribute to the emerging literature on the role of meditation in the entrepreneurial domain in several important ways. First, we provide experimental evidence of the effect of Loving-Kindness Meditation on environmentally ethical decision making of entrepreneurs. Second, we show that compassion is not a trait and can be positively influenced, even by brief loving-kindness meditation interventions. Third, we highlight the role of compassion for environmentally ethical decision making of entrepreneurs.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. We first provide an overview of the theoretical background linking Loving-Kindness Meditation and environmentally ethical decision making. This is followed by a review of the mediating role of compassion. Subsequently we describe the
experimental design and present the results. Finally, the implications of the study are discussed next to suggestions for future research.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Reframing Sustainability
Global sustainability issues such as climate change and environmental degradation are very abstract and intangible, which makes them difficult to understand and to get involved with (Markowitz & Shariff, 2012). The difficulty of grasping such intangible matters can be explained in an evolutionary context. Natural selection is not a planning, future oriented mechanism but instead favored human behavior and thinking which maximized the here and now (Griskevicius, Cantú, & Vugt, 2012). Our ancestors were less likely to survive and reproduce if they put too much energy into planning for the future rather than fulfilling urgent needs (Kacelnik, 1997). Even nowadays many people still focus on immediate gratification and outcomes while neglecting distant ones (Frederick, Loewenstein, & O’donoghue, 2002; Green & Myerson, 2004). Furthermore, the probability and gravity of future outcomes, such as environmental threats get underestimated (Hardin, 1995). The trend to discount the future is assumed to be a particularly problematic in western culture (Penn, 2003).
An explaining factor for this tendency is the modern decupling of production and consumption. Nowadays “people rarely see, feel, touch, hear, or smell how their behaviors affect the environment” (Griskevicius et al., 2012, p. 10). Consumers only see the finished, clean products they purchase in the store and not the factory that is polluting the environment during the production process (Griskevicius et al., 2012). To make these large-scale intangible problems more relevant and addressable for us as moral- and political actors, Jamieson (1992) suggests to view them as ethical and moral problems. To foster the identification of climate change as a moral
concern, Markowitz (2012) propose to increase the identification with and empathic feelings for future generations and other people on the planet.
Nonetheless, it is not enough to simply identify the problems and to develop a desire to solve them. To create positive change, actions are required. Even though there are individual consumers, who are changing their lifestyles and significantly reducing their consumption to live in a more sustainable way, this is simply not enough. Unfortunately, it is not realistic for the majority of the population to entirely change their purchasing behavior. This reluctance is partly due to our habitual nature and the reluctance to change and sacrifice (Neal, Wood, & Quinn, 2006). Thus, a possible solution could stem not from consumers but from businesses. As an alternative to drastic lifestyle changes, businesses need to offer alternative, sustainable products for consumers. Once businesses make it easy for consumers to live more sustainable lives without having to substantially change their purchasing behaviors, a large positive impact can be achieved (Oskamp, 2000). However, changing large businesses to adopt more sustainable practices is difficult due to their complex supply chains and distribution networks. The unsustainable business practices are often embedded from the early stages of the firm.
A possible solution to this problem would be to weave sustainable practices into the fabric of businesses from the beginning, thus eliminating the need for costly and resource intensive changes later on in the business lifecycle. Some new ventures take this to an extreme and are founded not primarily to make a profit but to address social and environmental problems. While social entrepreneurship is mainly concerned with solving societal problems, ecopreneurship is focused on environmental concerns. Together these two disciplines are referred to as sustainable entrepreneurship (SE) (Shepherd & Patzelt, 2011). Even though social entrepreneurship and ecopreneurship might appear as the most desirable solution towards a more sustainable future, it is unrealistic to expect all new businesses to be created in the realm of sustainable entrepreneurship.
Since every business has an impact on the environment, the planet could greatly benefit from more sustainable business practices of all ventures. Thus, ways need to be found, to motivate entrepreneurs to act in a more environmentally ethical way. A possible tool towards this change in motivation could be Loving-Kindness Mediation (Ericson et al., 2014).
Loving-Kindness Meditation and Environmentally Ethical Decision Making
Loving Kindness meditation (LKM) is a form of meditative practice that focuses especially on feelings of caring and warmth towards the self and others. This particular form of meditation dates back to Buddhist traditions (Salzberg, 2004), and boosts feelings of caring and warmth that are gradually extended in widening circles from close friends to complete strangers. The eventual stage is a feeling of connectedness and warmth towards all of humanity (Singer & Klimecki, 2014). the overarching idea rests on the basic Buddhist belief that all living beings are connected (Hofmann et al., 2011).
Scholars found that, compared to a control assignment, LKM significantly increased feelings of connection and positivity towards the self and strangers (Seppala et al., 2014). As a consequence of practicing meditation, people feel as one with the planet (Rosenberg, 1998) and thus even short LKM interventions increase feelings of positivity and connection towards strangers (Hutcherson et al., 2008). Viewing others as an extension of the self is called self-transcendence and leads people to view the problems and concerns of others as their own (Barber & Deale, 2013; De Juan Vigaray & Hota, 2008; Follows & Jobber, 2000; Schultz, 2000). Individuals scoring high on self-transcendence put greater emphasis on sustainable behavior as well as on benefits towards society (Barber & Deale, 2013). For entrepreneurs this would imply a stronger felt connection to people and the environment, which might be affected by their business decisions. Consequently it could lead them to make business decisions which reduce the possible harm to others.
As previously explained, problems of sustainability and climate change become more relevant when viewed as ethical problems. A major connection between LKM and environmentally ethical decision making (EEDM) stems from the increased awareness of the self and the environment. Ruedy & Schweitzer (2010) have shown that an increase in awareness leads to more ethical decision making, since making these decisions requires being aware that one is facing an ethical problem to begin with. When people are not aware that the decision they are facing is an ethical one they routinely fall back to other strategies such as cost-benefit analyses (Ruedy & Schweitzer, 2010). Especially in situations involving the environment this tendency is problematic, since decisions for the environment often appear costlier on the short run. For entrepreneurs, who need to decide how and where to produce their products, this could mean that they make unethical decisions simply because they are not thinking about the consequences their decisions might have on other people and the environment in other places. Thus, increasing awareness in these kinds of situations could have a substantial positive impact on the environment. The link between awareness and the environment has been investigated by Eco-psychologists, who suggest that awareness of our interdependence with the environment can help us act more sustainably and to transition from simply having environmentally friendly attitudes towards acting in a more environmentally ethical manner (Amel, Manning, & Scott, 2009). The researchers found that sustainable decisions require focused considerations and mindful behavior (Amel et al., 2009).
Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, & Finkel (2008) found that LKM can produce positive feelings which help to reduce habitual overconsumption and thus not only increase personal well-being but could also reduce resource use. These findings are in line with Jacob, Jovic, & Brinkerhoff (2009), who found that meditation increases our awareness and allows us to make more deliberate decisions, which are not guided by consumerism. By being more aware of the moment people think further about the impacts of their decisions and act more sustainable. The
decisions are more reflected and have a higher long-term benefit (Gilbert, 2006; Loewenstein & Schkade, 1999) Thus, meditation offers the potential to enable us to make more deliberate decisions, rather than use simple heuristics, which have negative consequences for us and the planet on the long-run (Jacob et al., 2009).
This notion also holds true for daily decisions. People who act with mindful awareness are more likely to make choices that do less harm to the environment while considering the impact their decisions have on others around them (Barber & Deale, 2013).
It appears to enable us to transition from over-consumption and environmental degradation to a more ecologically sustainable lifestyle while at the same time reducing negative affect (Fredrickson et al., 2008) and increasing our well-being (Jacob et al., 2009).
The focus in LKM extends to include the population as a whole (Hofmann et al., 2011) and is effective even if the recipients are not explicitly mentioned (Hutcherson et al., 2008; Parks, Birtel, & Crisp, 2014). The impact of unsustainable business practices cannot immediately be seen or felt as it might take years to have a noticeable negative effect. Thus entrepreneurs need to be able to adopt a bigger picture view and think about the impact their decisions will eventually have. Since the effect of LKM ultimately includes all of humanity and not just the immediate environment of the practitioner (Markowitz & Shariff, 2012), it can act as a tool to enable entrepreneurs to think about the impacts their decisions might have on people in faraway places and even future generations. Consequently, LKM might increase the sustainable behavior of entrepreneurs.
In sum, LKM appears to be beneficial in multiple ways. Firstly it heightens awareness, which increases ethical decision making (Ruedy & Schweitzer, 2010). Secondly it appears to increase a feeling of connectedness with the planet, which enables us to see global sustainability problems and climate change as problems that affect us as well. Consequently it appears to lead to
more ecologically sustainable behavior (Hofmann et al., 2011; Hutcherson et al., 2008; Parks et al., 2014; Richards & Martin, 2012).
Thus we propose the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1: Loving-kindness meditation positively affects entrepreneurs’ environmentally ethical decision making.
The Mediating Role of Compassion
As mentioned above, there are several possible mechanisms through which LKM may affect entrepreneurs’ environmentally ethical decision making. Yet, a prominent pathway to channel the effects of LKM is through its influence on compassion. Indeed, LKM puts particular emphasize on feelings of empathy and compassion towards others (Hofmann et al., 2011; Hutcherson et al., 2008; Parks et al., 2014; Richards & Martin, 2012). While empathy is described as feeling of concern for others and the ability to experience emotions that equal those of another person (Decety, 2011), compassion does not only involve the recognition but also the desire to alleviate another person’s suffering (Jazaieri et al., 2013). The main difference between the two is the urge to help those in need (Batson, 1991; Eisenberg, Lennon, & Roth, 1983; Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010).
Compassion is not a new topic and has been a part of the entrepreneurship literature for several years (e.g., see Dees, 2007). Especially in combination with motivations of co-founders, compassion has been investigated (Afuah, Allan, Tucci, 2012; Mair & Martí, 2006; Miller et al., 2012; Seelos & Mair, 2005; Shaw & Carter, 2007). As a valuable addition to traditional entrepreneurial theories, compassion leads to a distinctive reasoning that is worth investigating (Afuah, Allan, Tucci, 2012).
Compassion is not a trait but can be cultivated (Hofmann et al., 2011; Weng et al., 2013). The brain is able to show functional modifications following compassion training (Davidson &
McEwen, 2012; Klingberg, 2010; Lutz, Brefczynski-Lewis, Johnstone, & Davidson, 2008). Consequently, it is possible to teach and learn Compassion (Jazaieri et al., 2013). One possible way to cultivate compassion, is mindfulness meditation, which focusses on paying attention to the present and being more aware of ones surroundings (Birnie, Speca, & Carlson, 2010; Condon & DeSteno, 2011; Hollis-Walker & Colosimo, 2011; Lim, Condon, & Desteno, 2015; Shauna L Shapiro, Schwartz, & Bonner, 1998). However, LKM has been pointed out as a more direct way of increasing compassion (Boellinghaus et al., 2014). This difference is in line with Buddhist teachings, where compassionate responding is one of one the main motives of LKM (Condon, Desbordes, Miller, & DeSteno, 2013; Davidson, 2002). Indeed, multiple studies have confirmed that training in LKM increases compassion (Bishop et al., 2004; Hutcherson et al., 2008; S L Shapiro & Izett, 2008; S. Shapiro, 2016; Shauna L Shapiro, Astin, Bishop, & Cordova, 2005; Shauna L Shapiro, Brown, & Biegel, 2007; Shauna L Shapiro et al., 1998). Traditionally, LKM training sessions are spread out over multiple weeks (Fredrickson et al., 2008; Hofmann et al., 2011; Shahar et al., 2015). However especially for entrepreneurs, with a multitude of tasks, it is challenging to find the time to participate in week-long training sessions. Thus there is requirement for interventions that are less time consuming. Fortunately, a number of studies have indicated that even brief interventions are sufficient to cultivate compassionate feelings (Hutcherson et al., 2008; Logie & Frewen, 2015; Parks et al., 2014; Seppala et al., 2014).
Compassionate feelings have been the main focus of numerous spiritual and ethical traditions to promote more moral and cooperative societies (Armstrong, 2006; Davidson, 2002; Goetz et al., 2010; Nussbaum, 2003). The success of these traditions could be the tendency of compassion to have a positive effect on moral judgement (Haidt, 2003; McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001), especially in association with unwarranted harm (Haidt, 2003; Vasquez, Keltner, Ebenbach, & Banaszynski, 2001). Ruedy (2010) found that a higher sense of awareness
and compassionate feelings increases the likelihood of people to stick to their ethical standards and to use a more moral approach to make ethical decisions. In line with these findings, compassion has also been described as a ‘moral barometer’ (McCullough et al., 2001) and ‘a guardian of the moral domain’, guiding people’s decisions to alleviate others of suffering. In relation to viewing global sustainability issues and pollution, this tendency might lead entrepreneurs to rethink business decisions that might cause unnecessary harm to people and the environment.
However, compassion does not only influence moral reasoning and ethical decision making. It has also been shown to decrease self-focus (Batson, 2014), which leads people to concentrate less on personal gains and to pay more attention to the effect on others, and to view them as more similar and connected (Cialdini, Brown, Lewis, Luce, & Neuberg, 1997). Linked to the Buddhist notion of oneness (Hofmann et al., 2011), compassion increases a felt social connection (Seppala et al., 2014), which ultimately includes all of humanity and other species (Decety, 2011; Neff & Pommier, 2012; Tipsord, 2010). For entrepreneurs this would imply that they feel a stronger connection and similarity to people in other parts of the world and even future generations (Markowitz & Shariff, 2012). These people might be negatively affected by business decisions of the entrepreneur, that would harm the environment, increase pollution or climate change and.
Thus a stronger felt connection might explain why compassion increases harm-reducing actions (Goetz et al., 2010; McCullough et al., 2001). Multiple studies have linked compassion to increases in prosocial behaviors to benefit others (Jazaieri et al., 2013; Lim et al., 2015), even at a cost to oneself (Goetz et al., 2010). These findings are in line with earlier discoveries, which show that compassion positively influences helping behavior (volunteerism) towards strangers, without expecting anything in return (Fehr, Sprecher, & Underwood, 2009). Research closer to the realm of business has shown that even short compassion training increased prosocial economic behavior towards strangers (Leiberg, Klimecki, & Singer, 2011). Furthermore, compassion has a positive
influence on altruistic financial decisions (Weng et al., 2013) designed to help victims of unjust treatment. These results could mean that compassionate entrepreneurs reduce their focus on profit maximization, to help the environment and people, who are negatively affected by their actions. Furthermore, the compassionate behavior and alleviation of pain does not have to be immediate (Lu & Schuldt, 2016). These results have implications for entrepreneurship when seen in the broader context of the connectedness to all of humanity and future generations. Entrepreneurs could make more environmentally ethical decisions now, that would only later have a positive impact on future generations by not polluting the environment or fostering climate change.
The investigated studies provide an indication about motivation for social entrepreneurs and explain why social entrepreneurship has been referred to as a compassionate response to unmet needs (Dees, 1998; Fowler, 2000). And indeed, compassion has been linked to social venture creation (Miller et al., 2012). Higher levels of compassion lead entrepreneurs to put greater focus on alleviating pain and suffering of others and the pain of not doing so (Miller et al., 2012). Consequently, we propose:
Hypothesis 2: Compassion mediates the positive relationship between loving-kindness meditation and entrepreneurs’ environmentally ethical decision making.
FIGURE 1 Conceptual Model
METHOD Sample
The target population of the experiment are entrepreneurs in Amsterdam. Over the course of several weeks, participants were approached and asked to participate in the study at various co-working spaces as well as an entrepreneurship course at the University of Amsterdam. Since regular meditation can alter test results, participants who meditate regularly were excluded from the experiment. Additional exclusion criteria are missing data and participants who are not fully engaged in the experiment or questions afterwards. To find non-engaged participants, reversed scaling and an attention check question were used. From the originally 81 participants, 70 remained for analysis after applying the selection filter. Of the valid sample 37 individuals were randomized into the meditation condition and 33 were assigned to the control group. 44 participants were male and 26 female, with a mean age of 27. The entrepreneurs had 11 different nationalities with the majority of 67.1% being Dutch. The most common highest level of education was a bachelor’s degree. The participants’ companies had on average 2 co-founders and 48.6% of them were founded in 2015 or 2016. Only 8 of the companies were founded in 2011 or before. Of the firms
Environmentally Ethical Decision Making Compassion Loving-Kindness Meditation H1 H2
47.8% were private limited companies. Half of the investigated businesses had 2-5 employees. The companies were dispersed over 23 different industries with a dominance of internet companies and food services with 10% of companies respectively.
Procedure and Conditions
Participants were randomly assigned to either the treatment (LKM meditation) or control group (audio recording about meditation). The experiments were conducted at a number of co-working spaces in Amsterdam (B-Amsterdam, WeWork and De Ceuvel) as well as designated rooms at the University of Amsterdam. For each session there were a maximum of 4 people. Either both or one of the researchers gave the participants instructions about the procedure of the experiment. The experiment was conducted using the Qualtrics online platform on computers brought by the participants or the researchers. After giving informed consent, participants were asked to put on headphones and answer several general questions about themselves and their businesses. Subsequently they listened to either a guided loving-kindness meditation or a recording about meditation. Due to the automatic randomization of the Qualtrics software, the experiment could be conducted in a double blind fashion. Neither the participants nor the researchers knew in which treatment condition the subjects were. At the various locations multiple sessions were held over the span of three weeks to ensure participants’ availability.
Participants were told that the experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of meditation on decision making of entrepreneurs. To avoid a potential bias, the exact research questions were not communicated. The same experiment was used for two independent studies. One was the current study to investigate the effect on environmentally ethical decision making. The second study was investigating the effect on entrepreneurial creativity. Since the two studies were investigated using the same experiment and questionnaire, it became more difficult for
participants to guess what the study was about. This masking effect helped to further decrease potential bias.
Measures
Loving-Kindness Meditation. An existing recording of a LKM (11 minutes and 44 seconds), which had been used in previous research (Logie & Frewen, 2015), was used for the treatment group to follow along. The recording1 asked participants to develop feelings of love and kindness for themselves, friends, and strangers.
Control Condition. The control condition was identical to that of the treatment group yet instead of a meditation, participants in the control condition were listening to a modified recording2 of a speech about meditation (10 minutes and 37 seconds). The audio recording was chosen, since it provided participants with an overview about meditation without inducing a meditative state and potentially influencing the outcome of the experiment.
Environmentally ethical decision making. To measure EEDM, the entrepreneurs were presented with a scenario in which they had to make an ethical decision. Participants are placed in the position of an entrepreneur who utilizes a supplier in Asia, whose factory is likely polluting the environment. Stopping production could potentially put the entrepreneur out of business. Participants are asked to indicate their likelihood of stopping production immediately on a 7-point likert scale from (1) ‘Extremely Unlikely’ to (7) ‘Extremely Likely’. Compared to a questionnaire asking participants about past behavior, the dilemma is beneficial since it ensures participants’ answers were not about their behavior prior to the experiment but about a novel situation which
1 The original recording for the treatment group can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz7cpV7ERsM.
2 The original recording for the control group can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzR62JJCMBQ
could be influenced through the meditation. The scenario was adapted from the original version of (Qian, 2014) and is available in appendix A.
Compassion. To investigate if compassion is a mediating factor, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) was used (Davis, 1983a). It measures items on a 5-point likert scale ranging from (1) ‘Does not describe me well’ to (5) ‘Describes me very well’. The complete scale consists of four sub-scales with a total of 28 items. For the current study only the ‘Empathic concern’ subscale was used, since it is most appropriate to measure compassion. “The Empathic Concern (EC) scale measures the tendency to experience feelings of warmth, compassion, and concern for other people” (Davis, 1983b, p. 5). EC is explained as an “emotional response of compassion and concern caused by witnessing someone else in need” (Niezink, Siero, Dijkstra, Buunk, & Barelds, 2012, p. 1). Empathic Concern is used as an approach orientation (Davis, 1994; Heider, 2013; Lewin, 1938) to distinguish a demonstration of compassionate feelings from other emotional responses (Stocks, Lishner, Waits, & Downum, 2011). Closely related, compassion itself is described as a caring emotional response and the desire to alleviate others from their suffering (Batson, 1991; Eisenberg et al., 1983; Goetz et al., 2010). Since this study is investigating the tendency of entrepreneurs to show a compassionate response and to act in a certain situation, the scale for Empathic Concern is an ideal measurement tool. A reliability analysis of the 7 item scale revealed a Cronbach’s Alpha of .83. The corrected item-total suggest that all items have a good correlation with the total score of the scale (values above .30). Additionally, none of the items would substantially affect the reliability if deleted (values between .811 and .825).
Control Variables. There are several items, which could likely influence the results of the analysis if not controlled for. The first control variable is age, as it influences entrepreneurial activity (Alba-Ramirez, 1994). Gender has been found to have an influence on people’s environmentally ethical behavior and thus, should to be included as a control (Stern, Dietz, & Kalof,
1993). In addition, controlling for the educational level likely increase the quality of the results (Farmer, Yao, & Kung-Mcintyre, 2011). Especially in the context of environmentally ethical behavior, industry type appears to play a role as well and is included as a control variable (Ruf, Krishnamurty, Brown, Janney, & Paul, 2001). More importantly, it could be possible that the two groups have inherent differences in their level of mindfulness. To control for this possibility, trait mindfulness of participants was measured using the adapted 7-item MAAS scale (Brown & Ryan, 2003). A reliability analysis was conducted and shows a Cronbach’s Alpha of .66. Removing item 4 of the scale would increase the alpha to .704, however doing so might question the validity of the scale and the increase is too small to justify changing the scale. Thus, for further analysis a mean score was calculated including the questionable item. To ensure the MAAS scale would measure trait mindfulness and was not influenced by the manipulation, it was measured before the experimental manipulation.
RESULTS Preliminary Analysis
Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations per group, as well as all correlations. Several correlations are worth investigating. There is a significant correlation between compassion and the firm industry (r = .26 , p < .05). This relation further suggests the need to control for industry in later analyses. Additionally, the correlation matrix shows that LKM is positively related to EEDM (r = .35 , p < .01) and compassion (r = .40 , p < .01), while compassion shows a positive relation to EEDM (r=. 35 , p < .01). These results suggest that indeed meditation might have an influence on environmentally ethical decision making and that compassion might play a role in this relationship as well. The findings are in line with the hypotheses and are further investigated in the next part of the analysis.
TABLE 1
Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations Meditation Control n = 37 n = 33 Variables M SD M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 Age 27.73 6.39 27.21 8.21 2 Gender 1.41 .50 1.33 .48 -.03 3 Nationality 31.17 65.17 24.49 41.44 -.15 .13 4 Education 7.03 1.46 6.7 1.49 .09 .23 .13 5 Firm Age 3.05 1.97 3.92 6.25 .76** .17 -.11 .09 6 Industry 20.65 9.61 14.70 11.09 .01 -.06 .12 .09 .05 7 Firm Size 2.58 1.13 2.46 1.10 .10 -.18 -.09 .10 .01 .07 8 Compassion 3.70 .74 3.28 .74 -.14 -.04 -.02 -.13 -.28* .18 -.15 9 EEDM 3.68 1.70 2.68 1.31 .14 .12 .07 -.14 .03 .08 -.04 .35** .13 10 LKM 1 0 0 0 .04 .07 .06 .11 -.12 .28 .06 .40** .35** 11 MAAS 3.47 .63 3.73 .70 .11 -.13 -.09 .03 .14 -.05 -.27* -.11 -.08 -.21 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Randomization check. A multivariate analysis of variance (using Pilai's trace), with condition as the independent variable and age, gender, education, industry and MAAS as the dependent variables, showed no significant effects, V = .118, F (5, 64) = 1.705, p =.146. Looking into the univariate analyses regressing industry on condition revealed a significant difference among the groups on industry, F (1, 68) = 5.789, p = .019. Specifically, the control group (M = 14.70, SD = 11.1) was on average 5.95 lower than the treatment group (M = 20.65, SD =9.61). We provided 20 different options for industries, consequently the numbers for each category were very small. There are a number of industries significant differences between the two conditions. Internet (6 control, 1 meditation), Health (5 control, 0 meditation), Marketing (0 control, meditation) and Print (1 control, 5 meditation). Since the experimental condition was randomly assigned by the Qualtrics software and taking into account the small numbers for each industry, these differences are likely due to chance.
Hence, randomization into the experimental conditions was successful, with the exception of industry.
Manipulation check. To test whether the manipulation was effective, a previously established manipulation check was used (Hafenbrack, Kinias, & Barsade, 2013). Participants were asked about their experience during the recording. In particular, three items inquired participants to report the extent to which they were (1) focusing on their breathing, (2) focusing on the physical sensation of breathing and (3) that they felt in touch with their bodies. The three items were then combined into a mean score for the manipulation check (Cronbach’s Alpha=.85). An independent sample t-test was used to compare the manipulation check of the LKM treatment- and the control group. There was a significant difference between the scores for the LKM (M=3.44, SD= .79) and control condition (M=2.6, SD= .93); t (68) = 4.11 , p = .000. Thus, the manipulation was successful and the randomly sampled groups can be used for further analysis.
TABLE 2 Manipulation Check Meditation Control Variable M SD M SD t p 95% CI MC 3.44 .79 2.6 .93 4.11 .000 [.43 , 1.26] Main Effect
The ANOVA output shows a significant relation between LKM and EEDM F (1, 68) = 9.18, p = .003. The means are significantly different between the meditation condition (3.73) and the treatment (2.61) (see Figure 2). The results show that there is a significant positive relationship between Loving-Kindness Meditation and Environmentally Ethical Decision making. The results of the analysis need be regarded with care, since the data did not meet all assumptions needed for
the ANOVA and thus required the use of bootstrapping. A detailed overview of assumptions testing and bootstrapping is provided in Appendix D.
FIGURE 2
Mean Difference In EEDM Between The Conditions
In the second part of the analysis, a univariate analysis of variance is used to enable the inclusion of control variables. After controlling for Age, Gender, Education, Industry and trait mindfulness, there was a significant effect of Loving-Kindness Meditation on Environmental Ethical Decision Making, F (1, 63) = 8.16, p = .006. Even after controlling for the above-mentioned factors, the means did not change from the previous analysis and are significantly different for the meditation (3.73) and control (2.61) group. None of the control variables were significantly related to Environmentally Ethical Decision making. The controlled univariate analysis of variance shows support for Hypothesis 1.
Mediation Analysis
The final step of the analysis is to investigate the mediating effect of compassion on the relationship between LKM and EEDM. To test this mediating effect, bootstrapping inside the PROCESS macro for SPSS was used (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). A sampling distribution is formed
0 1 2 3 4 5 Meditation Control EED M Condition Meditation Control
by using the available data and forming many random samples from it (Tipsord, 2010). The macro utilizes a regression model to show the relation between variables.
In the previous section the ANOVA analysis showed a significant positive relation between LKM and EEDM. The regression analysis gives an indication about the strength of this relation. All results were gathered using a bootstrap sample of 5000 with a 95% confidence interval. Since none of the suggested control variables were significant in the ANOVA, they are not included in the PROCESS regression.
FIGURE 3 Mediation Model Results
The direct effect of LKM on EEDM was .79 with a standard error of .37. The direct relation was marginally significant at the .05 level (p = 0.05). These results indicate that a person who was in the meditation condition scored on average 0.79 higher on their intention to act environmentally ethical. However, the confidence interval showed that there is a 95% chance that the true effect lies between -.0017 and 1.58. The confidence interval includes zero, which means that the true direct effect might be zero as well. Hence, after including compassion as a mediating factor in the model
Environmentally Ethical Decision Making Compassion
Figure 3 – Conceptual Model
Loving-Kindness
Meditation c’ = .79
a = .55 b = .60
ab = .33
the direct effect of LKM and EEDM loses significance. This change in significance lends further support to Hypothesis 2 and the importance of compassion as a mediating factor.
TABLE 3
Statistical Effects of LKM on EEDM
BCa 95% CI
B SE Lower Upper
Direct effect of LKM on EEDM .79 .40 -.0017 1.864
Indirect effect of LKM on EEDM .33 .20 .059 .867
Total effect of LKM on EEDM 1.12 .37 .384 1.864
Note: N=70. ; 5000 bootstrap resamples.
The indirect effect of meditation was 0.33, which means that as a result of the meditation entrepreneurs develop more compassion, which leads to a 0.33 higher score on EEDM. This indirect effect is statistically different from zero. The Bootstrapped confidence interval shows that there is 95% chance that the true effect lies between 0.059 and 0.867. These significant results provide support for the second hypothesis..
Taken together, the direct and indirect effect combine to a total effect of LKM on EEDM, which is 1.12. These results suggest that entrepreneurs, who were in the meditation condition are estimated to score 1.12 units higher in their reported EEDM. This effect is statistically different from zero (t = 3.0295, p = .0035), with a 95% confidence interval between .384 and 1.864. Once more this suggest that there is only a 5% chance that the true effect lies outside of the interval between .38 and 1.86.
Even though these results confirm both the first and the second hypothesis, due to the before mentioned violation of assumptions, the findings need to be regarded with caution and cannot be taken as facts.
TABLE 3
Regression Output of Mediation Model
M (Compassion) Y (EEDM)
Antecedent Coeff. SE P Coeff. SE p
X a .55 .15 .0005 c’ .79 .40 .0505 M --- --- -- b .6 .292 .0406 constant i1 3.199 .11 .0000 i2 .658 .97 .4999 R2= .1641 R2= .1727 F(1,68) = 13.348 , p< .0005 F(2, 67) = 6.995 , p< .0017 DISCUSSION
With the prevailing threat of global warming and continuous environmental degradation, increasingly society is looking to blend ancient spiritual traditions with modern businesses to step in and pave the way for a more sustainable future. Loving-Kindness Meditation (LKM) and compassion have been proposed as ways of increasing environmentally ethical decision making (EEDM). The current study offers three important contributions. First, we show that compassion is a learnable skill. Second, we provide evidence that even brief LKM interventions can be enough to positively influence compassion. Finally, the results suggest that elevated compassion does indeed increase the likelihood of entrepreneurs to act environmentally ethical. Entrepreneurs can have a substantial positive impact on the path towards a more sustainable future by weaving sustainable practices into their businesses from the start. Our study provides a possible guideline for entrepreneurs how to elevate their compassion and in turn their environmentally ethical decision making.
Theoretical Contribution
The results of our study are in line with previous research, which showed that compassion is learnable and not just a trait (Weng et al., 2013). We build on the evidence of previous studies that compassion can be taught and learned (Davidson & McEwen, 2012; Hofmann et al., 2011; Jazaieri et al., 2013). We can also give support to the importance of LKM for cultivating compassion. In line with ancient Buddhist teachings, compassion has been found as an outcome of LKM (Condon et al., 2013; Davidson, 2002). Our results give further ground to the notion that even brief LKM interventions have the possibility to raise levels of compassion (Condon et al., 2013; Hutcherson et al., 2008; Jazaieri et al., 2013; Kemeny et al., 2012; Seppala et al., 2014; Shahar et al., 2015).
Even though the effects of meditation on compassion have been investigated before, scholars were suggesting to test different kinds of meditation for specific segments of the population (Lim et al., 2015; Weng et al., 2013). Our study contributed to the demands by showing the effect of LKM specifically for the segment of entrepreneurs. Our study adds to the literature by providing much demanded experimental evidence for the effect of compassion on others (Neff & Pommier, 2012), the relationship between meditation and sustainable behavior (Ericson et al., 2014) as well as the influence of compassion on entrepreneurs (Miller et al., 2012). Multiple scholars have pointed out an active control group as a valuable addition to their studies in LKM, compassion and sustainability (Birnie et al., 2010; Ericson et al., 2014; Fredrickson et al., 2008; Lim et al., 2015; Shahar et al., 2015). Through our experiment design we can confirm and lend more legitimacy to previous results about the links of LKM, compassion and EEDM.
Entrepreneurship theory can benefit from the findings through a more complete framework of Loving-Kindness meditation, compassion and environmentally ethical behavior. Ericson et al., (2014) investigated the effect of meditation and in particular mindfulness on sustainable behavior.
Their results show a connection between meditation and sustainable behavior. Ericson et al., (2014) also mention LKM, but merely as a tool to promote awareness and mindfulness and not for its benefits of increasing compassion, thus we can expand their results to include elevated compassion as a possible mechanism to increase sustainable behavior. Furthermore, since we used an experimental design, we can give more legitimacy to their findings of a connection between meditation and sustainable behavior.
Miller et al.,(2012) have investigated the role of compassion for founders motivations to start social ventures. The researchers found that compassion increases the likelihood of starting a social venture as compassionate response to unmet needs (Dees, 1998; Fowler, 2000). It has been found that compassion promotes integrative thinking and a prosocial cost-benefit analysis. These increases lead entrepreneurs to evaluate opportunities differently and to put more emphasize on the benefits of alleviating pain, thus increasing their likelihood of starting social ventures. Our results support their findings through experimental evidence, that elevated compassion increases the likelihood of acting prosaically to alleviate pain. We did not specifically look at intentions to start social ventures but rather at environmentally ethical behavior of all entrepreneurs since all businesses have an influence on the environment through their business decisions.
Practical Implications
The importance of protecting the environment, working sustainably and preventing global warming appears to be apparent in the modern business world. The weight of sustainable business actions is still rising. However, in the face of dilemmas between negative consequences for companies or the environment, the latter is rarely seen as the priority. Even today, there still exists a gap between intended caring for the environment and actually protecting it.
also all generations to come. Through the current study it might be possible to provide entrepreneurs with a clearer guideline of how to increase their environmentally ethical behavior while also helping themselves. This can be useful for all start-ups wanting to decrease their ecological footprint and increase their efforts towards a sustainable future. Mindfulness and compassion are only slowly entering the field of entrepreneurship but have the potential to greatly increase its positive impact. Loving-Kindness meditation has been shown to increase positive emotions (Fredrickson et al., 2008), personal well-being (Kok et al., 2013) and even to increase grey matter density (Lee et al., 2012; Leung et al., 2012; Lutz, Brefczynski-Lewis, et al., 2008). Additionally, it reduces self-criticism (Shahar et al., 2015) and stress (Law, 2011). All these features can be beneficial for entrepreneurs. Taken together with the findings of our study, LKM could be established as tool to decrease unsustainable behavior of entrepreneurs while incorporating a number of beneficial features. The additional benefits of LKM might make it easier to convince entrepreneurs to engage in LKM and could likely result in more environmentally ethical behavior as an added benefit. Incorporating sustainable business practices could prepare entrepreneurs for future developments. Consumers are increasingly demanding more sustainable products and governments are implementing stricter guidelines for products and business practices. For large corporations with established supply chains and networks it is a costly and resource intensive procedure to change their business practices to become greener. Startups have the chance of weaving sustainable practices into their businesses from the start. Operating sustainable businesses does not just protect the planet but can also be a source of competitive advantage once consumer demand increases or government regulations require it. Questions of sustainability are not just relevant in straight forward situations that can be seen as Corporate Social Responsibility. The truly important decisions are the ethical dilemmas that are not as easy to spot and even harder to decide on. With the help of LKM and the resulting compassion there is an increased chance that
more entrepreneurs will clearly think about the decisions they are making and act in a more environmentally ethical way. Since regular meditation requires discipline and at least 5-10 minutes on an ideally daily basis, co-working spaces provide the ideal implementation ground for Loving Kindness Meditation. These spaces could offer LKM sessions on a daily basis to help their entrepreneurs, the social interactions within the space and ultimately the planet as a whole.
Since our study has confirmed that even a recorded, brief LKM intervention shows positive results, the use of meditation apps could make the process of mediation even more convenient for entrepreneurs. Availability of meditation programs through an app will likely increase the engagement of entrepreneurs (Weng et al., 2013). In sum, our results show that entrepreneurs can lead the way towards a more compassionate and sustainable society through the use of even just brief loving-kindness meditation.
Limitations and Future Outlook
Although the research was planned and executed carefully, it is not without limitations. The first imperfections are in the design of the experiment. Participants were presented with one decision scenario, which was a very specific case of pollution by a supplier’s factory, which might be outside the scope of decisions dealt with regularly by most entrepreneurs in our sample. Even though the case was based on the tested scenario (Qian, 2014) it would have been beneficial to utilize a scenario which was closer to daily decisions of entrepreneurs in our sample
Apart from flaws in measurement, the treatment condition provides room for improvement. Participants were only engaged in one brief loving-kindness meditation session. The chosen experiment procedure was similar to prior studies (e.g., Logie & Frewen, 2015), however a longer treatment with multiple sessions (e.g., Condon et al., 2013; Fredrickson et al., 2008; Shahar et al., 2015)would have increased the quality of the study. Even though the results showed significant
differences between the meditation and the control condition, a longer study with multiple sessions could have possibly let to more profound and lasting findings. However, due to the busy schedules of most entrepreneurs, simply organizing one 30-minute session already proved to be rather demanding. Additionally, it would have been beneficial to create a perfect lab environment for all participants. However, this was not possible in the scope of the thesis and lab-like conditions were created in the various co-working spaces. Indeed, testing in different environments might even have beneficial outcomes for the generalizability of the study.
In addition, complications in the analysis of the data arose from the decision to only utilize one scale to measure the dependent variable of EEDM. The data was not normally distributed and the variances were not homogenous. Data transformation did not eliminate the problem. Even though bootstrapping improved the results, using multiple items to measure the environmentally ethical decision making of entrepreneurs could have likely prevented the difficulties in the analysis.
Many of the limitations of the study are simply due to the timeframe of the thesis project and the specificity of the sample. It would not have been feasible to conduct multiple meditation sessions or to significantly increase the sample size. However, future studies should take these suggestions into account as well as make use of multiple scenarios and measurement items to increase the quality and generalizability of the research.
Additionally, it would be interesting to investigate and compare the results of experiments in different countries to see if there are cultural differences among entrepreneurs operating in different parts of the world and not just Amsterdam. Furthermore, research would benefit from experimentally comparing different kinds of meditaions (Lim et al., 2015) and their effect on compassionate responses of entrepreneurs. Even though Boellinghaus et al.,(2014) suggest that LKM is the most effective way of promoting compassion, it would be interesting to experimentally test which is the most effective for entrepreneurs. Another uncertainty is the exact driver for the
increase in environmentally ethical decision making. Even though compassion has been shown as a significant predictor, other mechanism might be important to. Arend (2013) already critizised Miller (2012) for only investigating the role of compassion as motivator for social venture creation. Especially for environmentally ethical decision making it would thus be interesting to investigate different possible drivers. Researchers should investigate if the increase in EEDM is attributed more to a rise in moral reasoning and ethics or rather a stronger felt connection to the environment. Future studies should investigate this, using different scenarios that have a stronger focus on either ethical decisions involving people or environmental ones. In terms of research design, future studies with a larger scope should look into the long-term effects of LKM on compassion and EEDM. Does an intervention for entrepreneurs with multiple sessions increase compassionate responses and EEDM further than single interventions? Longitudinal studies should also investigate how long these elevated levels of compassion and EEDM last for entrepreneurs.
Since we only studied intentions to act environmentallt ethical, it would be ideal to compare intentions to actual behaviour of entrepreneurs. Researchers could investigate the real-life decisions entrepreneurs make with their businesses, following an LKM intervention. Even though the scope of such investigations would be substentially larger, it give provide evidence if LKM actually increases EEDM or just the intentions to do so.
CONCLUSION
The research took an unconventional approach in combining ancient, Buddhist meditation techniques with a modern ethical dilemma facing entrepreneurs. The results of the analysis provide evidence to support our conceptual model. Loving-Kindness Meditation does indeed have a positive influence on environmentally ethical decision making. In line with the theory, compassion acts as a mediating factor in this relationship. These results provide entrepreneurs with a clearer guideline of how to increase their environmentally ethical decision making. Mindfulness and compassion are only slowly entering the field of entrepreneurship but have the potential to greatly increase its positive impact. Loving-Kindness meditation could be established as tool to decrease unsustainable behavior of entrepreneurs while increasing their personal well-being. With the help of short meditation sessions, entrepreneurs have the potential to lead the way towards a more compassionate and sustainable future for all of us.
REFERENCES
Afuah, Allan, Tucci, C. (2012). Studying the Origins of Social Entrepreneurship: Compassion and Does Compassion Matter to Social Entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Review, 5 (40–464). http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0429
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What We Know and Don’t Know About Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311436079
Alba-Ramirez, A. (1994). Self-employment in the midst of unemployment: the case of Spain and the United States. Applied Economics. http://doi.org/10.1080/00036849400000001
Amel, E. L., Manning, C. M., & Scott, B. a. (2009). Mindfulness and Sustainable Behavior: Pondering Attention and Awareness as Means for Increasing Green Behavior. Ecopsychology, 1(1), 14–25.
Arend, R. J. (2013). A heart-mind-opportunity nexus: Distinguishing social entrepreneurship for entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 313–315. http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0251
Armstrong, K. (2006). The great transformation: The beginning of our religious traditions. Anchor. Bansal, P., & DesJardine, M. R. (2014). Business sustainability: It is about time. Strategic
Organization, 12(1), 70–78. http://doi.org/10.1177/1476127013520265
Barber, N. a., & Deale, C. (2013). Tapping Mindfulness to Shape Hotel Guests’ Sustainable Behavior. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(1), 100–114. Retrieved from http://cqx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/long/55/1/100
Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Batson, C. D. (2014). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Psychology Press.
Birnie, K., Speca, M., & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Exploring self-compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Stress and Health, 26(5), 359–371. http://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1305
Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., … Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 230–241.
Bloom, P. N., & Smith, B. R. (2010). Identifying the Drivers of Social Entrepreneurial Impact: Theoretical Development and an Exploratory Empirical Test of SCALERS. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 126–145. http://doi.org/10.1080/19420670903458042
Bobko, P., Roth, P. L., & Buster, M. a. (2007). The usefulness of unit weights in creating composite scores: A literature review, application to content validity, and meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 10(4), 689–709. http://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106294734
Boellinghaus, I., Jones, F. W., & Hutton, J. (2014). The Role of Mindfulness and Loving-Kindness Meditation in Cultivating Self-Compassion and Other-Focused Concern in Health Care Professionals. Mindfulness, 5(2), 129–138. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0158-6 Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in
psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
Certo, S. T., & Miller, T. (2008). Social entrepreneurship: Key issues and concepts. Business Horizons, 51(4), 267–271. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2008.02.009
Cialdini, R. B., Brown, S. L., Lewis, B. P., Luce, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (1997). Reinterpreting the empathy–altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 73(3), 481.
Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29–49. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.12.001
Condon, P., Desbordes, G., Miller, W. B., & DeSteno, D. (2013). Meditation increases compassionate responses to suffering. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2125–7. http://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613485603
Condon, P., & DeSteno, D. (2011). Compassion for one reduces punishment for another. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(3), 698–701.
http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.016
Davidson, R. J. (2002). Visions of compassion: Western scientists and Tibetan Buddhists examine human nature. Oxford University Press.
Davidson, R. J., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). Social influences on neuroplasticity: stress and interventions to promote well-being. Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695.
Davis, M. H. (1983a). A Mulitdimensional Approach to Individual Differences in Empathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
Davis, M. H. (1983b). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Westview Press.
De Juan Vigaray, M. D., & Hota, M. (2008). Schwartz’s values, consumer values and segmentation: The Spanish fashion apparel case, 2008-08. LEM Working Paper Series.
Decety, J. (2011). The neuroevolution of empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1231(1), 35–45. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06027.x
Dees, J. G. (1998). The meaning of social entrepreneurship. Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.
Dees, J. G. (2007). Taking social entrepreneurship seriously. Society, 44(3), 24–31.
Ding, X., Tang, Y.-Y., Cao, C., Deng, Y., Wang, Y., Xin, X., & Posner, M. I. (2015). Short-term meditation modulates brain activity of insight evoked with solution cue. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(1), 43–49.
Duong, P., & Pandey, D. (2014). Social Enterprise-An insight into its sustainability.
Eisenberg, N., Lennon, R., & Roth, K. (1983). Prosocial development: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 19(6), 846–855. http://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.19.6.846 Ericson, T., Kjønstad, B. G., & Barstad, A. (2014). Mindfulness and sustainability. Ecological
Economics, 104, 73–79. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.007
Farmer, S. M., Yao, X., & Kung-Mcintyre, K. (2011). The Behavioral Impact of Entrepreneur Identity Aspiration and Prior Entrepreneurial Experience. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(2), 245–273. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00358.x
Fehr, B., Sprecher, S., & Underwood, L. G. (2009). The science of compassionate love: Theory, research, and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
Follows, S. B., & Jobber, D. (2000). Environmentally responsible purchase behaviour: a test of a consumer model. European Journal of Marketing, 34(5/6), 723–746. http://doi.org/10.1108/03090560010322009
Fowler, A. (2000). NGDOs as a moment in history: beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation? Third World Quarterly, 21(4), 637–654.
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’donoghue, T. (2002). Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351–401.
http://doi.org/10.1257/002205102320161311
Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. a, Coffey, K. a, Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1045–1062. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0013262
Gilbert, D. (2006). Stumbling upon happiness. New York, NY: Random House Publishing). Hollis, JF (2008). Weight Loss during the Intensive Intervention Phase of the Weightloss Maintenance Trial. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 35(3), 118–127.
Goetz, J., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010). Compassion: An Evolutionary Analysis and Empirical Review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 351. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0018807 Good, D. J., Lyddy, C. J., Glomb, T. M., Bono, J. E., Brown, K. W., Duffy, M. K., … Lazar, S. W.
(2015). Contemplating Mindfulness at Work: An Integrative Review . Journal of Management , 42(1), 114–142. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315617003
Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004). A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychological Bulletin, 130(5), 769–792. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769
Griskevicius, V., Cantú, S. M., & Vugt, M. Van. (2012). The Evolutionary Bases for Sustainable Behavior: Implications for Marketing, Policy, and Social Entrepreneurship. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31(1), 115–128. http://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.11.040
Hafenbrack, A. C., Kinias, Z., & Barsade, S. G. (2013). Debiasing the Mind Through Meditation Mindfulness and the Sunk-Cost Bias. Psychological Science, 0956797613503853. http://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613503853
Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions,[w:] RJ Davidson, KR Scherer, HH Goldsmith. Handbook of Affective Sciences.
Hardin, G. (1995). Living within limits: Ecology, economics, and population taboos. Oxford University Press.
Heider, F. (2013). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Psychology Press.
Hofmann, S. G., Grossman, P., & Hinton, D. E. (2011). Loving-kindness and compassion meditation: Potential for psychological interventions. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(7), 1126–1132. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.003
Hollis-Walker, L., & Colosimo, K. (2011). Mindfulness, self-compassion, and happiness in non-meditators: A theoretical and empirical examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 222–227. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.033
Hutcherson, C. a, Seppala, E. M., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Loving-kindness meditation increases social connectedness. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 8(5), 720–724. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0013237
Jacob, J., Jovic, E., & Brinkerhoff, M. (2009). Personal and Planetary Well-being: Mindfulness Meditation, Pro-environmental Behavior and Personal Quality of Life in a Survey from the Social Justice and Ecological Sustainability Movement. Social Indicators Research, 93(2), 275–294. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9308-6
Jamieson, D. (1992). Ethics , Public Policy , and Global Warming, 17(2), 139–153.
Jazaieri, H., Jinpa, G. T., McGonigal, K., Rosenberg, E. L., Finkelstein, J., Simon-Thomas, E., … Goldin, P. R. (2013). Enhancing Compassion: A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Compassion Cultivation Training Program. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(4), 1113–1126. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9373-z
Kacelnik, A. (1997). Normative and descriptive models of decision making: time discounting and risk sensitivity. Characterizing Human Psychological Adaptations, 208, 51–66.
