Understanding mindfulness outcomes: a moderated mediation analysis of high-performance work systems

The study addresses the growing interest in mindfulness and the scarcity of empirical evidence in management and higher education faculty contexts. It investigates how trait mindfulness among management faculty relates to positive organizational outcomes—employee voice behaviour (EVB), faculty job satisfaction (FJS), and affective commitment (AC)—and to reduced burnout. The research tests a model in which EVB mediates the effects of mindfulness on these outcomes and examines high-performance work systems (HPWS) as a contextual moderator strengthening these relationships. Hypotheses: H1 mindfulness positively relates to FJS; H2 mindfulness negatively relates to burnout; H3 mindfulness positively relates to AC; H4 EVB mediates the mindfulness–FJS, mindfulness–burnout, and mindfulness–AC relationships; H5 HPWS positively moderates these relationships, making them stronger under high HPWS.

The paper reviews theoretical and empirical work on mindfulness, defining it as present-focused, nonjudgmental awareness (Bishop et al., 2004; Brown & Ryan, 2003; Langer, 1989, 1998) and distinguishing state and trait mindfulness, with the study focusing on trait mindfulness measured via CAMS-R. Prior research links mindfulness to improved attention, emotion regulation, and job outcomes. For faculty, mindfulness may heighten real-time awareness and evaluation of work, supporting FJS. Burnout is framed as emotional exhaustion and depersonalization (Maslach et al., 1996); mindfulness, through present-focused coping and reduced rumination, should mitigate burnout. AC, reflecting emotional attachment to the organization, is theorized to benefit from mindfulness via improved emotion regulation and goal-focused acceptance (Gardner & Moore, 2004). EVB—constructive, improvement-oriented speaking up—is proposed as a mediator because mindfulness fosters balanced, prosocial communication, thereby clarifying tasks, reducing anxiety, and enhancing satisfaction and commitment while lowering burnout. HPWS—bundles of complementary HR practices (infrastructure and job security)—are reviewed as contextual resources that promote participation, training, fair appraisal, and job security; they are expected to amplify the beneficial effects of mindfulness on outcomes by providing supportive structures and reducing risk associated with voice.

Design and sample: Cross-sectional, time-lagged survey of full-time faculty from Indian management schools listed in the 2018 NIRF top 100. Emails were collected from school websites; inclusion required full-time status and at least one year of affiliation. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Usable N=1092 (assistant professors=489, associate professors=398, professors=205); mean age=34.2 years; mean tenure=6.8 years; 63% male; all had a master’s degree and 72% held or pursued a Ph.D. Measures: Mindfulness via CAMS-R (Feldman et al., 2007), 10 items, 4-point scale, α=0.89 (one reverse-scored item); HPWS via Shih et al. (2006), 10 items (job infrastructure, job security), 5-point scale, α=0.76; EVB (constructive voice) via Maynes & Podsakoff (2014), 5 items, 5-point scale, α=0.91; FJS via Victorino et al. (2018), 4 items, 5-point scale, α=0.79; Burnout via MBI-GS (Maslach et al., 1996), using emotional exhaustion and depersonalization (14 items), 5-point scale, α=0.93; AC via Allen & Meyer (1996), 6 items, 7-point scale, α=0.90. Control variables: age, gender, tenure. Procedure to reduce CMV: Two-wave data collection separated by >15 days—Time 1: mindfulness, HPWS, EVB; Time 2: FJS, burnout, AC; same respondents were matched, and ANOVA indicated non-significant differences across waves (F=1.24, p<0.10). Harman’s single-factor test indicated the first factor accounted for 23% variance; CFA supported distinct constructs with superior fit for a six-factor model (χ²=1219, df=520, GFI=0.92, AGFI=0.90, NFI=0.93, CFI=0.93, RMSEA=0.04) versus alternative models. Analysis: Descriptive statistics and correlations were examined. Mediation, moderation, and moderated mediation were tested using Hayes PROCESS macro with bootstrapping (5000 resamples). Hierarchical regression assessed direct and mediated paths; Sobel tests evaluated indirect effects. Interaction terms (mindfulness×HPWS) tested moderation; conditional effects were probed at low/mean/high HPWS.

- Construct validity: Six-factor CFA showed good fit (χ²=1219, df=520, GFI=0.92, AGFI=0.90, NFI=0.93, CFI=0.93, RMSEA=0.04), supporting distinct constructs and low CMV. - Direct effects: Mindfulness positively predicted FJS (β=0.38, p≤0.01) and AC (β=0.54, p≤0.01), and negatively predicted burnout (β=-0.21, p≤0.01). Mindfulness also positively predicted EVB (β=0.62, p≤0.01). EVB positively predicted FJS (β=0.43, p<0.01) and AC (β=0.66, p≤0.01) and negatively predicted burnout (β=-0.36, p≤0.01). - Mediation: EVB significantly mediated the relationships between mindfulness and FJS (indirect β=0.21, p<0.01), mindfulness and burnout (indirect β=-0.09), and mindfulness and AC (indirect β=0.27, p<0.01). Sobel tests and bootstrapped CIs (5000 resamples, 95% CI) indicated significant indirect effects (e.g., mindfulness→FJS: z=6.13, p≤0.01; mindfulness→burnout: z=-11.01, p≤0.01; mindfulness→AC: z=5.12, p≤0.01). - Moderation (HPWS): Main effects of mindfulness and HPWS on outcomes were positive (FJS, AC) and negative (burnout), but interaction terms were stronger. Mindfulness×HPWS interactions were significant for FJS (β=0.41, p≤0.01), burnout (β=-0.10, p≤0.05), and AC (β=0.27, p≤0.01), indicating stronger beneficial effects of mindfulness under high HPWS. - Conditional moderated mediation: Indirect effects via EVB were stronger at higher HPWS levels for AC, FJS, and burnout; bootstrapped confidence intervals did not include zero for high HPWS, confirming conditional process effects. Overall, HPWS amplified both direct and indirect (via EVB) effects of mindfulness on outcomes. - Descriptive associations (correlations): Mindfulness correlated positively with FJS (r=0.43**) and AC (r=0.38**) and negatively with burnout (r=-0.31**).

Findings support the theorized model in which trait mindfulness among higher education management faculty enhances constructive voice, which in turn increases job satisfaction and affective commitment and reduces burnout. This suggests mindfulness cultivates present-focused awareness and balanced communication that facilitates timely issue-raising and problem-solving, leading to clearer tasks, reduced anxiety, and stronger emotional bonds with the organization. The moderating role of HPWS indicates that supportive HR infrastructures (participative decision-making, training, fair performance systems, and job security) provide resources and psychological safety that strengthen the impact of mindfulness on outcomes and reduce the perceived risks of speaking up. Thus, both individual psychological capacities (mindfulness) and organizational systems (HPWS) jointly shape positive attitudinal and well-being outcomes for faculty. The model addresses gaps in management and higher education contexts by integrating personality/psychological states, extra-role behaviors, and HR systems into a coherent conditional process framework.

The study demonstrates that trait mindfulness in faculty is associated with higher employee voice behaviour, greater job satisfaction and affective commitment, and lower burnout. EVB serves as a key mechanism through which mindfulness exerts its effects, and HPWS strengthens both direct and indirect relationships, underscoring the importance of aligning individual capabilities with supportive HR systems. Contributions include extending mindfulness research to higher education faculty, explicating EVB as a mediator, and establishing HPWS as a contextual amplifier. Future research should broaden samples beyond management faculties and national contexts, employ longitudinal or experimental designs to track mindfulness development over time, enhance procedural controls for CMV, and test additional outcomes and boundary conditions for EVB and HPWS across diverse organizational settings.

- Sample restricted to management faculty in Indian higher education; limits generalizability to other disciplines and cultures. - Cross-sectional, time-lagged design constrains causal inference; mindfulness may evolve over time, suggesting the need for longitudinal or intervention studies. - Data collected via email surveys across two intervals may still be subject to common method variance despite procedural and statistical controls. - Context limited to Indian management schools; cross-cultural comparisons (e.g., in countries with different HR systems or higher happiness indices) and inclusion of other higher-education disciplines are warranted.