Guida, S., Minutola, C. & Presti, G. (2026). Propagation, not aggregation: linking individual psychological flexibility to organizational functioning. Frontiers in Psychology 17: 1918803. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1918803.
Read in full on 2026-10-29 (NOTE-1353).
Why this is here
A42 of the exchange cited it for the owner’s U42 idea of carrying ACT and DBT to the organizational scale, and said “I would add both works to the record before claiming novelty for an organizational-flexibility interpretation of ACT” (the other is Bond’s Organizational Flexibility Model, not identified). Its thesis that flexibility is propagated through leverage over consequences is close to CLAIM-349 (access to a signal, its authority over action and action on it are separable; overcontrol is a maladaptive regime). A reading should come before that claim is asserted as new. The record holds the individual-scale account in LIT-553 (Kashdan & Rottenberg, read).
Note of 2026-10-29: Bond’s chapter, registered, and its citation corrected
Bond’s model, which “Why this is here” calls not identified and the version-2 history identifies, is now registered as LIT-1830, Unavailable. The citation that history gives, and NOTE-1353’s Connections with it, is wrong in two places. Checked against the book’s table of contents and a library catalogue (LIT-1830’s history), it is: Bond, F. W. (2018), “Organizational flexibility: creating a mindful and purpose-driven organization”, chapter 11 of D. S. Wilson and S. C. Hayes (eds.), Evolution and Contextual Behavioral Science: An Integrated Framework for Understanding, Predicting, and Influencing Human Behavior, Oakland, CA: Context Press, pp. 185–199. Pages 133–148 are another chapter, and Anthony Biglan wrote the book’s foreword; he is not an editor. Whether the error is this paper’s or the reading’s was not checked.