At school or in the office, mind wandering is often frowned upon. Students are told to “snap out of it,” and employees are nudged back to focus on the task at hand. Yet new research suggests that with the right support, what looks like distraction might in fact be a powerful tool for solving tough problems.
A joint team of researchers from the U.S. and the Netherlands has found that curious individuals who allow themselves to daydream around work challenges are more likely to experience strong epiphanies. These flashes of insight can not only spark innovative solutions but also renew a sense of meaning in their careers.
“For years, I was fascinated by the phenomenon of epiphanies, but I wasn’t sure how to study them, and I found the challenges that go with pursuing a new and uncharted line of research a bit daunting,” said Erik Dane, professor of organizational behavior at Olin Business School at Washington University, in a press release.
The team’s findings, published in the Journal of Management, may even encourage workplaces to consider workshops that embrace mind wandering as a path to those light-bulb moments.
Epiphanies and Curious People Who Daydream
The research involved business administration students, alumni, and aspiring business leaders in three different studies. Participants were assessed for their ability to have work-related epiphanies and were guided through professional workshops and individual coaching sessions designed to strengthen leadership skills.
Exercises encouraged students to reflect on key life events, the legacies they hoped to leave, and even their own mortality. Crucially, participants were also given time to let their minds wander. Daydreaming wasn’t treated as a lapse in focus but as an intentional part of the process.
The results were clear: Participants who allowed themselves to daydream while working through a challenge were more likely to experience meaningful insights. And those naturally drawn to tackling complex problems, typically more curious and motivated to expand their knowledge, gained the most. For them, daydreaming was less about escape and more about finding new pathways forward.
Why Daydreaming Works Well to Solve Problems
“Mind wandering is a particularly useful way to solve problems because it redirects attention away from existing solutions and helps people engage in imaginative thinking, entertaining brand new possibilities,” said Markus Baer, professor of organizational behavior at Washington University, in the news release.
He added that daydreaming provides a more playful and liberating approach compared to conventional, formal problem-solving methods.
Dane agreed: “When you daydream, you’re more likely to let go of assumptions — including unhelpful or outdated beliefs about yourself — and to think in flexible and innovative ways. And this opens the door to experiencing strong epiphanies.”
Sometimes, Dane explained, stepping back to see the bigger picture with a bit of free imagination can deliver not only fresh solutions but also a stronger sense of purpose.
Space for Daydreaming at Work
The researchers argue that organizations and business schools should recognize the value of problem-solving daydreaming by offering workshops and programs to nurture the skill.
Since many people are searching for greater career guidance, this research suggests they may benefit from first looking inward. Instead of waiting for external circumstances to inspire them, intentional reflection and daydreaming could help create the breakthroughs they seek.
“Epiphanies are one of the most memorable and impactful psychological events that people experience in their lives — and my research has helped me understand when and why people experience epiphanies and how epiphanies shape the ways in which people navigate their careers, gain self-confidence, collaborate with colleagues, and serve as leaders in organizations,” said Dane.
Article Sources
Our writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:
