Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:33:04.812Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mindfulness and Performance: Cautionary Notes on a Compelling Concept

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2015

Erik Dane
Erik Dane*
Affiliation:
Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Business, Rice University
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Erik Dane, Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Business, Rice University, 6100 Main Street, Houston, TX 77005. E-mail: erikdane@rice.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As Hyland, Lee, and Mills (2015) note, many conceptualizations of mindfulness include three characteristics. In particular, mindfulness is often defined as a state of consciousness in which an individual (a) focuses on the present moment, (b) attends to phenomena occurring both externally and internally, and (c) remains open to and accepting of observed stimuli—and thus avoids making judgments. Together, these characteristics grant insight into how mindfulness stands to improve performance in work settings. Just as directing attention to the work environment and the tasks and events associated with it can equip workers with key information for making decisions and help them identify and circumvent risks and threats, so too can attending to internal phenomena (e.g., emotions and intuitions) provide workers with useful inputs to the decisions they face (Dane, 2011). Furthermore, in refraining from making judgments and evaluations, workers are more likely to view unfolding events through a variety of lenses and are less likely to view their thoughts, feelings, and reactions as manifestations or indictments of who they are (Glomb, Duffy, Bono, & Yang, 2011). In line with these observations, researchers have hypothesized and provided evidence for positive relationships between mindfulness and the well-being and performance of workers (e.g., Allen & Kiburz, 2012; Dane & Brummel, 2014; Hülsheger, Alberts, Feinholdt, & Lang, 2013).

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 647 - 652
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, T. D., & Kiburz, K. M. (2012). Trait mindfulness and work–family balance among working parents: The mediating effects of vitality and sleep quality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 372–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Mrazek, M. D., Kam, J. W. Y., Franklin, M. S., & Schooler, J. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science, 23, 1117–1122.Google Scholar
Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 265–269.Google Scholar
Beauregard, K. S., & Dunning, D. (1998). Turning up the contrast: Self-enhancement motives prompt egocentric contrast effects in social judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 606–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the workplace. Journal of Management, 37, 997–1018.Google Scholar
Dane, E. (2013). Things seen and unseen: Investigating experience-based qualities of attention in a dynamic work setting. Organization Studies, 34, 45–78.Google Scholar
Dane, E., & Brummel, B. J. (2014). Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to job performance and turnover intention. Human Relations, 67, 105–128.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83.Google Scholar
Glomb, T. M., Duffy, M. K., Bono, J. E., & Yang, T. (2011). Mindfulness at work. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 30, 115–157.Google Scholar
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.Google Scholar
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Hülsheger, U. R., Alberts, H. J., Feinholdt, A., & Lang, J. W. (2013). Benefits of mindfulness at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 310–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyland, P. K., Lee, R. A., & Mills, M. J. (2015). Mindfulness at work: A new approach to improving individual and organizational performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8 (4), 576–602.Google Scholar
Kiken, L. G., & Shook, N. J. (2011). Looking up: Mindfulness increases positive judgments and reduces negativity bias. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 425–431.Google Scholar
Mason, M. F., & Reinholtz, N. (2015). Avenues down which a self-reminding mind can wander. Motivation Science, 1, 1–21.Google Scholar
Mooneyham, B. W., & Schooler, J. W. (2013). The costs and benefits of mind-wandering: A review. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 11–18.Google Scholar
Perdue, C. W., Dovidio, J. F., Gurtman, M. B., & Tyler, R. B. (1990). Us and them: Social categorization and the process of intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 475–486.Google Scholar
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006). The restless mind. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 946–958.Google Scholar
Vogus, T. J. (2011). Mindful organizing: Establishing and extending the foundations of highly reliable performance. In Cameron, K. S. & Spreitzer, G. M. (Eds.), Handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 664–676). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, J., Ding, W., Li, Y., & Wu, C. (2013). Task complexity matters: The influence of trait mindfulness on task and safety performance of nuclear power plant operators. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 433–439.Google Scholar