Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Stellar Organisations Making a Quantum Leap to a Sustainable World

Article Sidebar

A stellar organisations
Download PDF
Submitted   Aug 15, 2025
Published   Nov 21, 2025
Issue    Vol 7 No 1 (2025)
DOI   10.25082/REIE.2025.01.008

Views

39

Downloads

10

Citations

PlumX Metrics

Main Article Content

Nina Zupančič corresponding author
Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering, Department of Geology, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Abstract

This article builds on social quantum theory and complexity theory, proposing key characteristics of stellar organisations that aim to foster a more sustainable world. The concept of stellar organisations draws an analogy with the solar system: individuals gravitate toward the organisation’s core, or "sun"--encompassing its vision, mission, purpose, culture, objective key results, and more. Driven by change, stellar organisations incorporate resilience to prepare for future needs and challenges. Empowering proactive individuals to pursue greater sustainability within these organisations can help trigger a global quantum leap toward a more sustainable world. The article discusses various worldviews and concludes that actions within stellar organisations may help predict the timeline required to achieve a more sustainable world.

Keywords
sustainable worldview, sustainability, resilience, stellar organisations, change management

Article Details

How to Cite
Zupančič, N. (2025). Stellar Organisations Making a Quantum Leap to a Sustainable World. Resources Environment and Information Engineering, 7(1), 432-441. https://doi.org/10.25082/REIE.2025.01.008
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Leach M, Rockström J, Raskin P, et al. Transforming Innovation for Sustainability. Ecology and Society. 2012, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-04933-170211
  2. World Meterological Organization. State of the Global Climate 2020 (Report No. 1264), 2021. https://library.wmo.int
  3. O’Brien KL. Climate change and social transformations: is it time for a quantum leap? WIREs Climate Change. 2016, 7(5): 618-626. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.413
  4. Dyck B, Greidanus NS. Quantum Sustainable Organizing Theory. Journal of Management Inquiry. 2016, 26(1): 32-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492616656407
  5. Baumann O. Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research. Mind & Society. 2015, 14(2): 169-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-015-0168-x
  6. Kok KPW, Loeber AMC, Grin J. Politics of complexity: Conceptualizing agency, power and powering in the transitional dynamics of complex adaptive systems. Research Policy. 2021, 50(3): 104183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104183
  7. Zupancic N. Systematic Literature Review: Inter-Reletedness of Innovation, Resilience and Sustainability - Major, Emerging Themes and Future Research Directions. Circular Economy and Sustainability. 2022, 3(3): 1157-1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00187-5
  8. Sammut-Bonnici T. Complexity Theory. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. Published online January 22, 2015: 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom120210
  9. Heisenberg W. The development of quantum mechanics. Nobel Lecture, 1993.
  10. Kantabutra S. Toward a behavioral theory of vision in organizational settings. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2009, 30(4): 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730910961667
  11. Reyes JR, Kleiner BH. How to Establish an Organisational Purpose. Management Decision. 1990, 28(7). https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749010004665
  12. Emery J. Leading for organisational change. Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2019
  13. Falsey TA. Corporate philosophies and mission statements: A survey and guide for corporate communicators and management. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1989.
  14. Dermol V. Relationship Between Mission Statement and Company Performance. Annals of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University - Economics. 2012, 59(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/v10316-012-0022-9
  15. Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L. The value of corporate culture. Journal of Financial Economics. 2015, 117(1): 60-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.05.010
  16. Joseph OO, Kibera F. Organizational Culture and Performance: Evidence From Microfinance Institutions in Kenya. Sage Open. 2019, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019835934
  17. Westley FR, Tjornbo O, Schultz L, et al. A Theory of Transformative Agency in Linked Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society. 2013, 18(3). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-05072-180327
  18. Westley F, Olsson P, Folke C, et al. Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation. AMBIO. 2011, 40(7): 762-780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0186-9
  19. McCarthy DDP, Whitelaw GS, Westley FR, et al. The Oak Ridges Moraine as a Social Innovation: Strategic Vision as a Social-Ecological Interaction. Ecology and Society. 2014, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-06212-190148
  20. Razvani Z. Who is a middle manager? International Journal of Family Business and Management. 2017, 1(2): 1–9.
  21. OECD: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies (2017). Slovenija: Zdravstveni profil leta 2017, State of Health in the EU. OECD Publishing, Paris/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Brussels. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264285422-sl
  22. Benyus J. Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 1997.
  23. Zupančič N, Palanović A, Ružojčić M, et al. Differential influence of basic psychological needs on burnout and academic achievement in three southeast European countries. International Journal of Psychology. 2023, 59(2): 288-302. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12938
  24. Holden LM. Complex adaptive systems: concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2005, 52(6): 651-657. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03638.x
  25. Carmichael T, Hadžikadić M. The Fundamentals of Complex Adaptive Systems. Complex Adaptive Systems. Published online 2019: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20309-2_1
  26. Rovelli C. Seven Brief Lessons on Physics. Great Britain: Penguin Books, 2014.
  27. Lavazza A. Why Cognitive Sciences Do Not Prove That Free Will Is an Epiphenomenon. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00326
  28. Deci EL, Olafsen AH, Ryan RM. Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. 2017, 4(1): 19-43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108
  29. Olafsen AH, Deci EL, Halvari H. Basic psychological needs and work motivation: A longitudinal test of directionality. Motivation and Emotion. 2017, 42(2): 178-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-017-9646-2
  30. Jang H, Reeve J, Ryan RM, et al. Can self-determination theory explain what underlies the productive, satisfying learning experiences of collectivistically oriented Korean students? Journal of Educational Psychology. 2009, 101(3): 644-661. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014241
  31. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist. 2000, 55(1): 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68
  32. Liu D, Zhang S, Wang L, et al. The effects of autonomy and empowerment on employee turnover: Test of a multilevel model in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2011, 96(6): 1305-1316. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024518
  33. Reeve J. A Self-determination Theory Perspective on Student Engagement. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Published online 2012: 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7
  34. Redman CL. Should Sustainability and Resilience Be Combined or Remain Distinct Pursuits? Ecology and Society. 2014, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-06390-190237
  35. United Nations Brundtland Commission. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: our common future. Oslo, Norway: United Nations General Assembly, Development and International Co-operation: Environment, 1987. http:// www.un-documents.net
  36. Seghieri J, Brouwers J, Bidou JE, et al. Research and development challenges in scaling innovation: a case study of the LEAP-Agri RAMSES II project. Agroforestry Systems. 2020, 95(7): 1371-1382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00532-3
  37. Reidsma P, Meuwissen M, Accatino F, et al. How do Stakeholders Perceive the Sustainability and Resilience of EU Farming Systems? EuroChoices. 2020, 19(2): 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692x.12280
  38. Dong L. Toward Resilient Agriculture Value Chains: Challenges and Opportunities. Production and Operations Management. 2021, 30(3): 666-675. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13308
  39. Olsson P, Galaz V, Boonstra WJ. Sustainability transformations: a resilience perspective. Ecology and Society. 2014, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-06799-190401
  40. Meuwissen MPM, Feindt PH, Spiegel A, et al. A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems. Agricultural Systems. 2019, 176: 102656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102656
  41. Galaz V, Olsson P, Hahn T, et al. The Problem of Fit among Biophysical Systems, Environmental and Resource Regimes, and Broader Governance Systems: Insights and Emerging Challenges. Institutions and Environmental Change. Published online August 22, 2008: 147-186. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262240574.003.0005
  42. Larsson M, Milestad R, Hahn T, et al. The Resilience of a Sustainability Entrepreneur in the Swedish Food System. Sustainability. 2016, 8(6): 550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060550
  43. Karman A, Savanevičienė A. Enhancing dynamic capabilities to improve sustainable competitiveness: insights from research on organisations of the Baltic region. Baltic Journal of Management. 2020, 16(2): 318-341. https://doi.org/10.1108/bjm-08-2020-0287
  44. Hedlund-de Witt A. Exploring worldviews and their relationships to sustainable lifestyles: Towards a new conceptual and methodological approach. Ecological Economics. 2012, 84: 74-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.09.009
  45. Rigolot C. Sustainability transformations as shifts in worldviews: a dynamic view of complementarity issues. Ecology and Society. 2018, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-10101-230222
  46. van Egmond ND, de Vries HJM. Sustainability: The search for the integral worldview. Futures. 2011, 43(8): 853-867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2011.05.027
  47. Thompson M, Ellis R, Wildavsky A. Cultural Theory. Routledge, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429501180
  48. Chuang F, Manley E, Petersen A. The role of worldviews in the governance of sustainable mobility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2020, 117(8): 4034-4042. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916936117
  49. Pearce D. Blueprint 3: Measuring sustainable development. London, England: Earthscan, 1993.
  50. Landrum NE. Stages of corporate sustainability: Integrating the strong sustainability worldview. Organization & Environment. 2018, 31(4): 287-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086/26617717456
  51. Gare A. Natural Philosophy and the Sciences: Challenging Science’s Tunnel Vision. Philosophies. 2018, 3(4): 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies3040033
  52. Whitehead AN. Modes of Thought (p.171). The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1938.
  53. Rovelli C. The Order of Time. Great Britain: Penguin Books, 2018.
  54. Gentry BA. Time as a measure of change (Doctoral dissertation), 2019. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu
  55. Ponte D, Pesci C. Institutional logics and organizational change: the role of place and time. Journal of Management and Governance. 2021, 26(3): 891-924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-021-09578-6
  56. Flyverbom M, Garsten C. Anticipation and Organization: Seeing, knowing and governing futures. Organization Theory. 2021, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211020325
  57. Donatti CI, Harvey CA, Hole D, et al. Indicators to measure the climate change adaptation outcomes of ecosystem-based adaptation. Climatic Change. 2019, 158(3-4): 413-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02565-9