Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Additional services for Industrial and Organizational
Email alerts: Click here
Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Mindfulness at Work: A New Approach to Improving Individual and Organizational
Patrick K. Hyland, R. Andrew Lee and Maura J. Mills
Industrial and Organizational Psychology / Volume 8 / Issue 04 / December 2015, pp 576 - 602
DOI: 10.1017/iop.2015.41, Published online: 15 July 2015
Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1754942615000413
How to cite this article:
Patrick K. Hyland, R. Andrew Lee and Maura J. Mills (2015). Mindfulness at Work: A New Approach
to Improving Individual and Organizational Performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8,
pp 576-602 doi:10.1017/iop.2015.41
Request Permissions : Click here
Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/IOP, IP address: 184.108.40.206 on 07 Jan 2016
Industrial and Organizational Psychology,8(4), pp 576–602 December 2015.
Copyright © 2015 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. doi:10.1017/iop.2015.41
Mindfulness at Work: A New Approach to
Improving Individual and Organizational
Patrick K. Hyland
Sirota Consulting, Purchase, New York
R. Andrew Lee
The Potential Project, Danbury, Connecticut
Maura J. Mills
In recent years the concept of mindfulness has become increasingly popular, and
with good reason. A growing body of research indicates that mindfulness provides a
number of physical, psychological, and even performance benets. As a result, some
spite growing interest, mindfulness has received little attention from the industrial–
organizational community. In this article, we provide an overview of what mindful-
ness is, where the concept came from, how it has been utilized and studied to date,
researchers and practitioners.
In recent years the concept of mindfulness has become increasingly popu-
lar among various audiences, including organizational leaders, employees,
consultants, coaches, and psychologists. PsycINFO includes over 2,000 arti-
cles, books, and dissertations addressing mindfulness (Glomb, Duy, Bono,
&Yang,2012), and Amazon.com has over 2,000 books on mindfulness.
One probable reason for this popularity is a growing body of research
showing that mindfulness provides a number of physical and psychological
benets. For decades now, clinical psychologists and medical doctors have
used mindfulness techniques to help people cope with a range of illnesses,
Patrick K. Hyland, Sirota Consulting, Purchase, New York; R. Andrew Lee, The Po-
tential Project, Danbury, Connecticut; Maura J. Mills, Department of Psychology, Hofstra
Note that all authors contributed equally, and names are listed alphabetically.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Patrick K. Hyland,
Sirota Consulting, 4 Manhattanville Road, Suite 101, Purchase, NY 10577. E-mail:
including depression, anxiety, and chronic pain (Baer, 2003). In recent years,
researchers have started exploring the workplace benets of mindfulness,
nding that mindfulness may improve everything from social relationships,
resiliency, and task performance (Glomb et al., 2012) to task commitment,
enjoyment, and memory (Levy, Wobbrock, Kaszniak, & Ostergren, 2012).
As a result, many organizations and corporations have started oer-
ing mindfulness programs to their workforce. Companies including Aetna
(Wolever et al., 2012), General Mills (Gelles, 2012), and Google (Kelly, 2012)
have established mindfulness training programs in order to enhance em-
ployee well-being and eectiveness. The U.S. Army has implemented the
Mindfulness-Based Mental Fitness program, with positive results (Jha, Stan-
ley, Kiyonaga, Wong, & Gelfand, 2010). Harvard Business School, Drucker
Graduate School of Management, Stern School of Business at New York Uni-
versity, and Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley,
represent just some of the graduate schools that have implemented formal
mindfulness programs to support their students’ success.
Mindfulness is also generating a great deal of new research interest. The
number of research publications on mindfulness has increased exponentially
in recent years, from 52 articles in 2003 to 549 in 2013 (Black, 2014). Cur-
rently the National Institutes of Health is funding 81 studies on mindfulness,
representing a total investment of $100.2 million (Harrington, 2014).
Despite growing interest in business, government, and academia,
mindfulness has received comparably little attention from the industrial–
organizational (I-O) community. For example, only two articles on mind-
fulness (by the same author, U. R. Hülsheger) have appeared in the Jour-
nal of Applied Psychology (Hülsheger, Alberts, Feinholdt, & Lang, 2013;
Hülsheger et al., 2014). Considering a growing body of literature indicates
that mindfulness oers a wide range of potential benets at work, this is
Our goal for this article is to provide I-O researchers and practitioners
with an overview of what mindfulness is, where the concept came from, and
how it has been utilized and studied to date in various clinical and organiza-
tional settings. Specically, in this article we will
•discuss the origins of mindfulness, trace its evolution, and describe how
has been dened and conceptualized;
•review research to date, highlighting the antecedents, correlates, and
consequences of mindfulness;
•show how mindfulness can benet employees and organizations;
•discuss mindfulness interventions and how they can be utilized within
•propose new directions for researchers and practitioners.
578 . .
generates, members of our I-O community will have a more comprehensive
understanding of what we know—and what we still need to learn—about
mindfulness at work.
The Emergence of Mindfulness in the Workplace
is closely related to traditional Buddhist mind training methods. In Bud-
dhist practice, mindfulness is the act of seeing things as they truly are in the
present moment (Gunaratana, 2011). Although we may think that we nat-
urally experience our surroundings as they are, this is rarely the case. Most
of the time our perception is limited by our attention span; fragmented by
continuous distractions; distorted by our biases, assumptions, and expec-
tations; and regularly hijacked by our emotional reactivity. Mindfulness is
the capacity to perceive our world clearly, without adulteration or manipu-
lation. Yet the Buddhist conceptualization of mindfulness is not simply an
attentional process. It also has an attitudinal component, whereby mindful-
ness is imbued with an attitude of open-minded curiosity and an intention
of kindness and compassion (Gunaratana, 2011).
Buddhist practice holds that a clear, stable, and focused mind is an es-
sential requirement for eective mental training and purication, which will
eventually lead to the cessation of the suering caused by ignorance and self-
delusion (Bodhi, 1994). However, it is worth noting that Buddhism is not
the only religion that promotes contemplative practices. Meditative practices
predate Buddhism by perhaps thousands of years, and they were well estab-
lished in northern India at the time of the Buddha, around 400 BCE (Lopez,
2001). Many spiritual traditions include a variety of contemplative practices
to aid in spiritual development. For example, in the Christian tradition, con-
templative prayer has been practiced and taught for centuries, starting with
the desert fathers and mothers of Egypt and continuing through the Middle
Ages to modern times. Various contemplative practices also exist in both Is-
lam and Hinduism. In fact, most religions have practices involving stillness,
movement, chanting or singing, and visualization (Center for Contemplative
Mind in Society website; Plante, 2010).
Secular mindfulness training is a relatively recent development. The cur-
rent boom in the research and practice of secular mindfulness can began
with the work of Jon Kabat-Zinn (see Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Kabat-Zinn, Lip-
worth, & Burney, 1985). Kabat-Zinn was a postdoctoral medical student at
the University of Massachusetts Medical School and a longtime meditator
who had personally experienced the benets of mindfulness practices. It was
during a meditation retreat that he came upon the idea to develop a program
that makes the benets of mindfulness practice accessible to a broader, non-
Buddhist audience (Kabat-Zinn, 2011).
Kabat-Zinn developed a program at the University of Massachusetts
Medical School designed to benet the hospital’s most challenged pa-
tients: those who suered from chronic pain and illness, to whom the
hospital’s medical sta had little to oer. The program that Kabat-Zinn
and his colleagues developed and rened became known as Mindful-
ness Based Stress Reduction, or MBSR. Over the last 35 years, MBSR
pain, stress, anxiety, and other symptoms and conditions. Since then, over
600 people have been trained to teach MBSR globally, and over 20,000
people have taken the program at the UMass Center for Mindfulness
alone (http://www.umassmed.edu/cfm/stress-reduction/). MBSR is an 8-
week program that meets once a week for 2.5 hours, with an additional full-
day class between the sixth and seventh weekly classes. In addition, there is
the expectation that participants spend about 45 minutes a day in mindful-
ness practice. The success of MBSR led to the development of a number of
clinically oriented mindfulness-based programs and approaches including
Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT; Segal, Williams, & Teasdale,
2002), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (Linehan, 1993), and Acceptance and
Commitment Therapy (Hayes, 2012), all of which have research supporting
their eectiveness. Since then, a number of mindfulness-based programs and
protocols have also been developed to address specic conditions includ-
ing substance abuse (Bowen, Chawla, & Marlatt, 2011)andeatingdisorders
Mindfulness Training in the Workplace
Until recently, mindfulness training in the workplace consisted mostly of
lightly customized MBSR programs. In the last decade, however, work-
place training has emerged as a separate eld from the broader eld
of MBSR-based secular mindfulness training, Today, several larger orga-
nizations and numerous smaller rms specialize in oering workplace
mindfulness training, including AppropriateResponse,theInstitutefor
Mindful Leadership, The Potential Project, and the Search Inside Yourself
The format and content of workplace mindfulness programs has been
adapted from the MBSR model to be more conducive to the workplace. For
example, courses have been designed so that employees take less time away
from their work tasks. Individual classes are generally shorter than the MBSR
standard of 2.5 hours, often lasting 60 to 90 minutes. Expectations for daily
practice are also reduced from the MBSR standard of 45 minutes to 10 to
15 minutes. There is a broad range in the length of courses, ranging from
580 . .
5 to 12 weeks, although another approach to make courses more accessible
is to oer them as one-time, multiday retreats. This is especially helpful in
gaining the participation of senior executives. In addition, mindfulness pro-
grams are now also accessible online, both in real time and asynchronously,
enabling employees to save on travel time by participating directly from
Initial research has suggested that both shortened and online programs
are associated with positive work-related benets (see Klatt, Buckworth, &
Malarkey, 2008; Wolever et al., 2012). However, it is worth noting that con-
as Langer and Moldoveanu (2000) noted, mindfulness is intended to be a
process—by its very nature requiring time and patience—so if shortened in-
terventions water down that key component of mindfulness and paint the
reap all of the potential benets. As mindfulness research and workplace ap-
plication move forward, it is crucial that these concerns be balanced against
the legitimate need for more time-sensitive, accessible, and cost-ecient in-
Researching Mindfulness: Deﬁnitions and Theoretical Underpinnings
As the practice of mindfulness has become more popular in recent decades,
research on mindfulness has increased exponentially. But scholars have faced
challenges translating the concept into a clearly operationalized construct.
For example, mindfulness has been dened various ways by teachers, prac-
titioners, and researchers. Thich Nhat Hanh (1976), a widely read Bud-
dhist monk, denes mindfulness as “keeping one’s consciousness alive to the
present reality” (p. 11). MBSR founder Jon Kabat-Zinn (2005) denes mind-
fulness as “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present
moment, and nonjudgmentally” (p. 4). Cognitive psychologist Elainor Rosch
(2007) states that mindfulness is “a simple mental factor that can be present
or absent in a moment of consciousness. It means to adhere, in that moment,
to the object of consciousness with a clear mental focus” (p. 259). Consider-
ing the wide range of denitions, Grossman (2008) noted that “mindfulness
is a dicult concept to dene, let alone operationalize” (p. 405).
Although denitions vary, most conceptualizations of mindfulness have
three common elements. First, mindfulness is present-focused conscious-
ness (Dane, 2011).Atthecoreofmostdenitionsofmindfulnessisafo-
cus on the “here and now” (Herndon, 2008, p. 32), which requires “giv-
ing full attention to the present” (Thondup, 1996, p. 48). If you are ru-
minating about the past or focused on the future, you are not exhibiting
mindfulness (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Second, mindfulness involves paying
close attention to both internal and external phenomena (Brown & Ryan,
2003;Dane,2011;Glombetal.,2012). These include internal stimuli, such
as thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations, as well as external stimuli,
including sights, sounds, smells, and events, occurring in one’s physical and
social environment (Glomb et al., 2012; Kabat-Zinn, 2005). Third, mindful-
ness involves paying attention to stimuli in an open and accepting way, “with-
out imposing judgments, memories, or other self-relevant cognitive manip-
ulations on them” (Glomb et al., 2012, p. 119). Brown, Ryan, and Creswell’s
(2007) denition of mindfulness—one of the denitions most commonly
cited by researchers and academics—captures these three elements. They
state that mindfulness is “a receptive attention to and awareness of present
moment events and experiences” (p. 212).
Most scholars have dened mindfulness as an individual, state-level
variable that enhances cognitive, psychological, and physiological function-
ing in various ways. The most commonly cited benet is self-regulation
(Glomb et al., 2012): Mindfulness prevents an individual from thinking or
behaving in mechanical or mindless ways by disrupting the automaticity of
mental processes (Chaiken, 1980). Mindfulness allows an individual to dis-
engage from automatic thought patterns, engrained brain states, emotional
lters, and cognitive schemas and “experience what is instead of a commen-
tary or story about what is” (Shapiro, Carlson, Astin, & Freedman, 2006,
p. 379, italics in original). Bond, Hayes, and Barnes-Holmes (2006)argue
that in a state of mindfulness, one has more psychological exibility (Hayes,
Strosahl, Bunting, Twohig, & Wilson, 2004)andcanmakechoicesthatare
Based on a growing body of research showing that some individuals are
more mindful than are others, mindfulness has also been described as a dis-
positional or trait-like quality (Baer & Lykins, 2011). Studies have found
that dispositional mindfulness is positively related to a number of other
benecial individual dierence variables, including emotional intelligence,
self-compassion, openness to experience, and psychological well-being (see
Brown et al., 2007, for a review). In addition, mindfulness has also been de-
scribed as a set of skills that can be learned through practices like medita-
tion and therapeutic interventions like acceptance and commitment ther-
apy (Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999), dialectic behavior therapy (Linehan,
1993), MBCT (Segal et al., 2002), and MBSR (Kabat-Zinn, 1982,1990). As
discussed in the following section, these practices and therapies have been
shown to produce a number of benets.
Before concluding this review of the conceptual foundations of mind-
fulness, it is important to consider one additional line of research. Through-
out this section, we have focused on denitions of mindfulness that em-
phasize an open, receptive quality of mind that is free from judgment and
582 . .
analysis. It is important to note, however, that an alternative denition has
been posited by Langer (1989b), who dened mindfulness as an “active
information processing” mode (p. 138). Although there are some similarities
between Langer’s conceptualization of mindfulness and those described ear-
lier, there are a number of fundamental dierences. For example, Langer em-
phasizes that mindfulness requires categorizing, judging, and problem solv-
ing, activities that are inconsistent with concepts like acceptance and non-
judging. Aware of such dierences, Langer (1989a) cautioned against mak-
ing comparisons between her conceptualization of mindfulness and those
inuenced by Buddhist thinking. With that in mind, her line of research and
approach to mindfulness will not be discussed in the rest of this article. (For a
discussion of the similarities and distinctions between these two approaches
to mindfulness, see Brown & Ryan, 2003;Brownetal.,2007; Langer 1989a;
Langer & Moldoveanu, 2002).
Various research methodologies have been used in the study of mindful-
ness, ranging from survey designs to experimental studies, cross-sectional
as well as longitudinal. In survey and experimental research, two of the most
popular psychometric measures of mindfulness are the Freiburg Mindful-
ness Inventory (FMI; Buchheld, Grossman, & Walach, 2001)andtheMind-
fulness Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS; Brown & Ryan, 2003). The
FMI has both a long form (30 items) and a short form (14 items), and the
FMI is able to discriminate between experienced meditators versus others,
although Belzer et al. (2013) suggested that it might be improved for use
in the meditation-naïve samples. Both forms of the FMI have consistently
been found to be psychometrically sound. The MAAS has 15 items, and it
too has been found to be psychometrically sound and to successfully dis-
tinguish those with various levels of experience with mindfulness. How-
ever, it has been criticized (Walach, Buchheld, Buttenmuller, Kleinknecht,
& Schmidt, 2006) for placing too much focus on the attention and aware-
ness aspects of mindfulness to the exclusion of other components (e.g., ac-
ceptance, present focus, nonjudgmental state). Other mindfulness surveys
have included the Toronto Mindfulness Scale (Lau et al., 2006)andthe
Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Scale (Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004), al-
though neither has seen the relative popularity that the FMI and MAAS
ployed in mindfulness research. Hülsheger and colleagues (2013)conducted
a two-study research design, in the rst phase using the MAAS and other
relevant surveys (e.g., job satisfaction, emotional exhaustion) in collabora-
tion with a 5-day diary study methodology during which 219 employees
completed surveys at two time points each day (immediately at the end of
the work day and prior to retiring to bed at night). Hülsheger et al.’s second
phase was an experimental study in which participants were randomly as-
signed to a control group or to a self-training mindfulness (MBSR) program
and Goolkasian (2010), however, used a slightly dierent methodology, uti-
lizing a quasi-experimental design to examine the ecacy of meditation
training in university students. Finally and perhaps most rigorously, Jensen
Vangkilde, Frokjaer, and Hasselbalch (2012) used a blinded experimental de-
sign in which they assigned meditation novices to a mindfulness (MBSR)
group, a nonmindfulness stress reduction group, or a control group, with
the latter group further split into nonincentivized and incentivized groups
to manipulate attentional performance. In addition to self-report scales,
Jensen et al. (2012)alsousedsalivacortisolsamplesasaphysiologicalin-
dicator of stress. Arguably the most physiologically sophisticated methodol-
ogy for studying mindfulness is the usage of functional magnetic resonance
imaging (fMRI) to investigate how mindfulness can alter brain functioning.
Such techniques have been used in a variety of studies to be discussed later,
including Farb et al. (2010); Modinos, Ormel, and Aleman (2010); and Kil-
patrick et al. (2011).
As previously mentioned, a majority of mindfulness studies involve
some type of training or intervention. Although a wide variety of mindful-
ness interventions have been attempted, the two most popular are MBCT
(Segal et al., 2002) and MBSR (Kabat-Zinn, 1982). Segal and colleagues’
(2002) MBCT trainings utilize well-supported cognitive behavioral therapy
techniques typically with the primary intention of positively impacting a pa-
tient who may suer from depression. With this in mind, MBCT works from
the premise that many individuals at risk for depression tend to think them-
selves into a negative spiral of thoughts, ruminating in a way that can prompt
a depressive episode. The focus of MBCT, then, is to preventor interrupt this
nonjudgmental way and to let it pass without further thought or concern
(Felder, Dimidjian, & Segal, 2012).
Kabat-Zinn’s (1982) 8-week-long MBSR training program was devel-
oped by Kabat-Zinn and his colleagues at the University of Massachusetts’
Stress Reduction Clinic. Much research has been conducted on this particu-
lar mindfulness program, and it has consistently been shown to be eective
as initially developed as well as several variants of it (Chaskalson, 2011). It
involves training participants in several mindfulness practices. One foun-
dational practice involves cultivating a focused attention on the sensations
of one’s breathing while allowing thoughts, emotions, and physical sensa-
584 . .
thoughts or events but instead to let them come, accept them as they are,
and let them pass without analyzing, judging, or ruminating on them. This
practice cultivates the capacity of participants to become more fully aware of
everyday events as well as their reactions to them without becoming overly
attached to, identied with, or plagued by them. MBSR has been utilized in
full (8-week) form (e.g., Brown & Ryan, 2003; McCraty, 2003)aswellasin
shortened installments (e.g., Farb et al., 2010).
Although MBCT and MBSR dier slightly in focus, both are clini-
cally oriented programs typically hosted in group sessions wherein mind-
fulness skills are taught over an (ideally) extended period of time, typically 8
weeks, and students are requested to meditate for approximately 45 minutes
the sitting meditation, hatha yoga postures, and the body scan. As described
by Jensen and colleagues (2012),thebodyscanrequirespractitionerstoclose
their eyes, preferably while lying down, and to carefully and progressively fo-
cus on each area of the body, noticing any sensations that are present from
moment to moment from a nonjudgmental viewpoint.
The practices utilized by MBCT and MBSR can also be practiced during
intensive training retreats, during which they may be practiced for 10 hours
or more each day (Forte, Brown, & Dysart, 1987). However, researchers have
also been exploring the ecacy of brief mindfulness trainings. For exam-
ple, Zeidan and colleagues (2010) demonstrated the ecacy of an interven-
tion that exposed participants to mindfulness training for 20 minutes per
day over a period of 4 days. In addition, Hafenbrack, Kinias, and Barsade
(2014) demonstrated that a single 15-minute mindfulness intervention has
a signicant eect on participants’ problem-solving skills. However, Jha and
colleagues’ (2010) ndings expressed some concern in this regard, indicat-
ing that mindfulness training time may aect its ecacy, with longer train-
ing programs yielding more successful and sustainable results than shorter
Related to this is the concern that, due to realistic application concerns
within the workplace and its strict time limitations, some mindfulness train-
ing programs enacted within organizations may not be optimally ecacious.
That is, as mindfulness training programs are increasingly adopted within
organizational environments, it is likely that the empirically supported train-
ing programs will be severely curtailed in order to meet the time constraints
of organizations. A similar concern is that the increasing popularity of such
trainings may increase the possibility that untrained or inexperienced con-
sultants or organizational personnel will attempt to lead mindfulness train-
ings. Without properly trained facilitators, such trainings are unlikely to
yield the same level of eectiveness on important individual and organiza-
tional outcomes (Chaskalson, 2011).
Effects of Mindfulness
The eects of mindfulness have been shown to be enduring and wide reach-
ing. Mindfulness training programs have evidenced sustained enhancement
in a variety of domains, including physical, psychological, cognitive, and
The health benets of mindfulness are often thought to be primarily
limited to stress reduction. Although mindfulness practice has in fact been
showntoreducehighstresslevels(Woleveretal.,2012), which themselves
health risks, the physical health benets of mindfulness meditation are far
more wide reaching (Williams, 2006). For instance, decreased blood pressure
(both systolic and diastolic) has been found to be associated with mindful-
ness practice in a variety of experimental, controlled studies, including those
specically examining participants with hypertension (McCraty, 2003)and
self-reported high stress levels (Nyklíˇ
cek, Mommersteeg, Van Beugen, Ra-
makers, & Van Boxtel, 2013). High-stress participants have also been found
to benet from mindfulness meditation to the extent that it can improve not
only their blood pressure but also their breathing rate and heart rhythm as
Davidson and colleagues (2003) further found that mindfulness medi-
tation practices both improved energy levels and enhanced the immune sys-
tems of employees in high-stress jobs. Malarkey and colleagues (Malarkey,
Jarjoura, & Klatt, 2013) recently found that mindfulness practice can also
lead to decreased c-reactive protein levels (associated with inammation)
among obese individuals, and they further suggested that the eect may
be even stronger among nonobese participants. Finally, in a review, Chiesa
and Serretti (2010) noted a variety of other physical benets that have been
shown to result from mindfulness meditation practice, including decreased
chronic pain and a reduction of symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, multiple
sclerosis, bromyalgia, psoriasis, and even HIV.
But benets are not limited to the physical realm. A substantial propor-
tion of the most frequently supported benets of mindfulness meditation are
psychological and aective in nature. On a broad level, mindfulness practice
has been repeatedly evidenced to decrease global psychological distress (Mc-
Craty, 2003;Williams,2006) and improve overall mental health (Chu, 2010).
In fact, perhaps the most commonly cited psychological benet of mind-
job types, mindfulness trainings, and employee stress levels (e.g., Chu, 2010;
Davidson et al., 2003;Foureur,Besley,Burton,Yu,&Crisp,2013; Galantino,
Baime, Maguire, Szapary, & Farrar, 2005; McCraty, 2003;Roeseretal.,2013).
Mindfulness practice has also been linked with decreased anxiety (Davidson
et al., 2003; Orzech, Shapiro, Brown, & McKay, 2009;Roeseretal.,2013), as
586 . .
well as decreased instances of depressive symptoms (Farb et al., 2010;Mc-
Craty, 2003;Roeseretal.,2013). In fact, Kuyken and colleagues (2008)found
that an 8-week MBCT program was more eective at reducing long-term
depression than were antidepressant drugs.
The psychological benets of mindfulness meditation can also be seen
in less extreme instances. Even for individuals without clinical depres-
sion, mindfulness practice has been consistently shown to improve mood
and aect. For instance, Davidson and colleagues (2003) found increased
mood and happiness among employees in a high-stress job who com-
pleted a mindfulness meditation program. These ndings were echoed in
a study by Galantino and colleagues (2005) among healthcare profession-
als. Orzech and colleagues (2009) similarly found enhanced subjective well-
being among participants in a month-long mindfulness training program,
and McCraty (2003) found that participants reported an overall increase in
emotional health and a more positive outlook on life after only a brief mind-
Three other studies went a step further, oering three more specic
and distinct operationalizations of mindfulness’s impact on emotion/mood.
Williams (2006) found that mindfulness practice led to positive attitudinal
change as well as positive modications in resulting behaviors, in addition to
a decrease in the extent to which the negative impact of daily hassles aected
the mindfulness-trained individuals. Notably, these positive shifts were even
more evident at the 3-month follow-up period than they were immediately
after the mindfulness training. More recently, some researchers have taken
the methodology to a more scientic level, using fMRI technology to fur-
ther tease out mindfulness’s impact on emotion. Using this technique, Modi-
nos and colleagues (2010) found that mindfulness meditation aected par-
ticipants’ reappraisal of emotional stimuli, whereby it decreased the extent
to which they experienced negative emotional responses. Similarly, Farb
and colleagues (2010) found that individuals who participated in an 8-week
mindfulness training program reacted dierently (as seen on fMRI) to sad-
ness provocation versus a control group, such that the mindfulness-trained
group were not as negatively aected by negative-emotion-inducing stimuli,
thereby further conrming Modinos and colleagues’ ndings.
Other benets of mindfulness training have been identied. For in-
stance, as compared with control groups, mindfulness trainings have been
shown to reduce the extent to which employees experience emotional ex-
haustion in their jobs (Hülsheger et al., 2013), particularly when those jobs
are in known high-stress elds (Galantino et al., 2005). Other research
(Chu, 2010) has found that increased mindfulness meditation experience
is associated with higher levels of emotional intelligence, the four compo-
nents of which are self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and
relationship management. Baer (2003) likewise found that mindfulness
meditation might improve one’s relationships with others as a result of re-
duced reactivity. Interestingly, although not surprisingly, it appears that such
emotional and caring characteristics are also extended not only to others
butalsototheself,asOrzechandcolleagues(2009) found that intensive
mindfulness training was associated with enhanced self-compassion from
pretraining to the 1-month follow-up period.
Such psychological benets of mindfulness have cognitive roots, and re-
search has consistently found that mindfulness meditation practice signi-
cantly and positively impacts brain activity as well as the density of neural
gray matter in the dorsal portions of the prefrontal cortex, the area of the
brain responsible for key functional capabilities such as learning, memory,
aective processing, emotion regulation, perspective taking, and facilitating
adaptive responses to stress (Davidson et al., 2003;Hölzeletal.,2011;Modi-
nos et al., 2010). Jha, Krompinger, and Baime (2007)alsofoundthatsuch
meditation increases activity in the anterior cingulate cortex region of the
brain, an area responsible for self-regulation of attention.
Indeed, substantial research has supported Jha et al.’s (2007) nding that
meditation resulted in signicantly increased attention and awareness in a
meditation group as compared with a control group. Specically, Jha et al.
(2007) found that attention-related behavioral responses such as spatial ori-
enting and spatial navigation abilities were improved, as was the ability to
be selectively attentive, a skill necessary in spatial navigation in order to
avoid becoming disoriented or lost. Chambers, Lo, and Allen (2008) simi-
larly found signicant improvements in working memory performance and
sustained attention in participants in an intensive 10-day mindfulness medi-
tation retreat as compared with individuals in a control group. More recently,
Kilpatrick et al. (2011) used fMRI methodology in nding that 8 weeks of
MBSR training is associated with a more consistent attentional focus, en-
hanced reective awareness of sensory experience, and improved sensory
processing. Zeidan et al. (2010) similarly found that even brief mindfulness
training improved participants’ visual-spatial processing and their perfor-
mance on cognitive tasks necessitating sustained attention.
Zeidan et al. (2010)alsofoundthatsuchtrainingscouldalsoimprove
participants’ overall executive functioning, including positive eects on the
well as positively impacting participants’ working memory capacity. Such a
nding has been repeatedly evidenced by multiple studies, including that of
Jha et al. (2010), which in addition to their aforementioned ndings also
found that working memory capacity increased for the experimental groups
thatreceivedmindfulnesstraining.Roeseretal.(2013) similarly found that
a 36-hour mindfulness training program disbursed over 8 weeks increased
588 . .
focused attention and working memory capacity in a sample of teachers.
Anicha,Ode,Moeller,andRobinson(2012) also echoed these ndings, in-
dicating that mindfulness practice was positively associated with enhanced
perceptual abilities in working memory and cognitive control exibility.
As may be deduced from mindfulness’s impact on cognitive function-
ing, substantial recent research has also suggested that mindfulness practice
should also be viewed as something that can readily contribute to business
success. Teper and Inzlicht (2014) suggest that mindfulness practice aects
how one reacts to constructive criticism or feedback, such that people may
be more attuned to evaluating and accepting the feedback with less concern
for enacting self-protective psychological mechanisms that may erroneously
reject negative feedback or focus too much on positive feedback, and in the
process also rejecting recommendations for improvement. This decreased
emotional reactivity also transfers into the protection that mindfulness of-
fers against eeting emotional highs that may lead to rapid or impulsive de-
cision making in business dealings. Fiol and O’Connor (2003)suggestthat
mindfulness practice may lead to better decision making such that individu-
als practicing mindfulness will be more likely to (a) understand the value of
information for current circumstances and (b) interpret unexpected results
as relevant rather than dismiss them, even when they do not fall in line with
current or past (familiar) practices or ndings. As such, mindful employees
immediate rewards in favor of the long-term picture, a characteristic key to
enduring success and growth. This is further supported by Hayes (2004),
who found that mindfulness practice led to increased psychological exi-
bility; Shapiro et al. (2006), who found that mindfulness practice led to an
who found that even a single period of mindfulness practice improved the
ability to resist cognitive bias.
Moreover, Chaskalson (2011) further suggested that mindfulness is also
likely to positively impact a variety of other notable workplace outcomes,
including creativity, innovation, resilience, work engagement, productivity,
communication skills, reduced conict, absenteeism, and turnover. Many
of Chaskalson’s suggestions have been empirically supported. For instance,
Howell and Buro (2011) found that mindfulness practice is predictive of
achievement as mediated by enhanced achievement-related self-regulatory
abilities. Levy and colleagues (Levy et al., 2012) further found that mind-
fulness meditation enhanced task endurance and dedication and decreased
control group. In addition, they found that participants in the former group
reported less negative task-related emotions than did participants in the lat-
company, nding that employees practicing mindfulness had better sales
performance than did those who did not practice. Interestingly, Seligman
noted that the worst performing employees were those who were pessimistic.
He further suggested that humans have a natural tendency to be pessimistic,
although this can be altered through mindfulness training that discourages
Furthermore, beyond the performance-relevant outcomes as discussed
above, mindfulness practice can also have job-relevant outcomes that are of
particular import to the employees themselves. For instance, Hülsheger et al.
(2013) found that mindfulness practice promotes job satisfaction and aids in
the prevention of burnout from emotional exhaustion, a nding echoed by
others (Krasner et al., 2009; Oman, Richards, Hedberg, & Thoresen, 2008;
Roeser et al., 2013). Others have further found that mindfulness training
impacts empathy for others (clients, patients) as well as for oneself (occupa-
tional self-compassion; Roeser et al., 2013), in addition to enhancing both
patient-centered care and caregiving self-ecacy among health care profes-
sionals in particular (Allen, Bromley, Kuyken, & Sonnenberg, 2009;Krasner
et al., 2009;Omanetal.,2008). Such enhanced emotional self-awareness re-
sulting from mindfulness (Creswell, Way, Eisenberger, & Lieberman, 2007)
is particularly notable in regard to the workplace. Specically, McCall, Lom-
bardo, and Morrison (1988) noted that lack of emotional self-control has
been suggested as being a key obstacle toward leadership success, thereby
making mindfulness practice even more relevant in relation to workplace—
and specically leadership—achievement and success.
Mindfulness Applications for Organizational Effectiveness
Considering these ndings, there are many compelling reasons to consider
implementing mindfulness programs in the workplace. Here we highlight
Managing Employee Stress
The prevalence of chronic stress in our culture makes it a serious public
health issue. Sixty-seven percent of Americans report experiencing emo-
tional symptoms of stress, and 72% report experiencing physical symptoms
(American Psychological Association, 2014). Over the last 30 years, self-
reported levels of stress have increased 18% for women and 25% for men
(Cohen & Janicki-Deverts, 2012).
Managing stress in the workplace is a similarly serious issue. Forty per-
cent of workers report that their jobs are “very or extremely stressful,” and
26% of workers say that they are “often or very often stressed at work”
(National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1999). Reducing
stress is not only a benet to individuals, it also has a signicant impact
590 . .
on organizational eectiveness. It is estimated that workplace stress costs
American business up to $150 billion a year (Sauter, Murphy, & Hurrell,
1990). These costs come in the form of increased health care costs, increased
absences, and decreased productivity and performance.
The eects of mindfulness training on employee health and wellness
have been well documented. Most prominent among them is a signicant
decrease in experienced stress levels. In fact, many of the other health bene-
ts resulting from mindfulness training either may be the direct result of, or
may be signicantly enhanced by, decreased stress. For organizations look-
ing to reduce workforce stress and build resilience, mindfulness training may
Improving High Potential Development
The development of future leaders is a top concern for business. U.S. orga-
nizations spent an estimated $24 billion on leadership development in 2013
(Bersin, 2014), which constitutes 35% of the total training spend. Yet the re-
sults of this expenditure have been less than satisfactory, with 75% of CEOs
citing leadership development as a top concern and only 15% expressing sat-
isfaction with their high potential practices (Corporate Leadership Council,
2005). In fact, it is estimated that 40% of high potential promotions end in
What can mindfulness training do to enhance high potential develop-
ment? The single biggest factor in derailment is a lack of self-awareness
(Hogan, Hogan, & Kaiser, 2010). According to McCall (1998)andothers,
high potential leaders accumulate a track record of success, which may lead
them to become overcondent in their own abilities and less open to others’
ness, so an increase in mindfulness will correspond to an increase in self-
awareness. Therefore, it stands to reason that mindfulness training could
eectiveness of organizational high potential processes (see Lee, 2012).
Enhancing Engagement, Reducing Burnout
Engagement is dened as the extent to which employees are intellectually,
emotionally, and behaviorally invested in their jobs (Kahn, 1990). Employee
engagement has been linked to greater employee satisfaction, lower turnover
intention, and an increase in organizational citizenship behaviors (Saks,
2006). Mindfulness has been linked to both decreased emotional exhaustion
(Hülsheger et al., 2013) and increased employee engagement (Leroy, Anseel,
Dimitrova, & Sels, 2013). Dane and Brummel (2014) also found that mind-
fulness was related to both increased performance and decreased turnover
intention. In addition, a review of 10 studies on MBSR training for health
care professionals found consistent evidence of decreases in emotional ex-
haustion and symptoms of burnout and increases in mood, positive aect,
and satisfaction (Irving, Dobkin, & Park, 2009). By implementing mindful-
ness programs, organizations may be able to increase employee engagement
and commitment, especially for high-stress and high-burnout jobs.
Helping Employees Cope With Organizational Change
With organizational change becoming increasingly common in today’s
eorts often fail because of employee resistance (Beer, Eisenstat, & Spector,
1990; Burke & Biggart, 1997;Porras&Roberston,1983). Based on various
ndings, mindfulness may help employees cope with organizational change
in various ways. For example, Bond and Bunce (2003)foundthatemploy-
ees with higher levels of acceptance—a key component of mindfulness—had
higher levels of job control at work. Mindfulness could reduce the stress as-
sociated with the loss of job control that often happens during organizational
higher levels of mindfulness are associated with lower levels of ego-defensive
reactivity under threat. This suggests that mindful employees may be less
self-focused and reactive during a change eort. Researchers have also noted
that mindfulness encourages objectivity—the quality of seeking to possess
the “full facts” in a manner similar to an objective scientist seeking accurate
information (Brown et al., 2007;Rahula,1974;Smith&Novak,2004). Such a
stance toward reality encourages a deferral of judgment until a careful exam-
ination of facts has been made (Nyaniponika, 1973). This way of evaluating
events may oer numerous benets during times of change. Flexible, objec-
tive, mindful employees may be more open to new ways of doing things and
may be more observant and attentive while learning new behaviors. They
may also be more accurate and objective, rather than reactive or pessimistic,
in assessing the potential benets of organizational change eorts.
Mindfulness Training in Organizations
For practitioners seeking to implement a mindfulness program in their or-
ganization, a number of options exist. Mindfulness training for workplace
audiences can take many forms. One way is delivery of the MBSR program
itself in the workplace. MBSR consists of three elements. However, as dis-
cussed earlier, the time demands of this program make it impractical for
delivery in organizations. Therefore, mindfulness training for workplace ap-
plications has been adapted in several ways. First, weekly classes are gener-
ally shorter, lasting anywhere from 1 to 2 hours. Second, expectations for
daily mindfulness practice are also shorter, ranging from 10 to 20 minutes
daily. Other adaptations to workplace audiences include oering training as
592 . .
a one-shot osite event. This has been used eectively with senior leadership
audiences by the Institute of Mindful Leadership and for general audiences
by the Search Inside Yourself Leadership Institute. Mindfulness training is
also available online through both prerecordedcourses and live virtual class-
rooms, such as the programs oered by eMindful.
All of these programs described above have data supporting their eec-
tiveness, including peer-reviewed studies. Yet as mindfulness training sup-
pliers and modalities continue to multiply, it will become increasingly im-
portant for practitioners to evaluate the ecacy of any mindfulness training
program before deploying it organizationally.
Current Questions and New Directions
Mindfulness is clearly a promising new construct. Given the mounting ev-
idence highlighting the numerous benets of mindfulness, more coaches,
practitioners, and researchers are looking for ways to incorporate mindful-
ness into their interventions, experiments, and eld studies. Nevertheless, a
number of practical, empirical, and ethical concerns remain. Here we high-
light four questions that have emerged and deserve further attention.
How Can We Best Conceptualize and Measure Mindfulness?
As noted earlier, mindfulness has been dened a number of dierent ways
by researchers, clinicians, and practitioners. It has been conceptualized as a
that focus on everything from mindlessness (e.g., Brown & Ryan, 2003)to
exibility (e.g., Bodner & Langer, 2001). Although some may argue that there
are more similarities than dierences across the current denitions and mea-
sures of mindfulness, even small dierences can lead to construct validity
concerns. For example, in a quasi-experiment with meditation practitioners,
Brown, Kasser, Ryan, Alex Linley, and Orzech (2009)usedboththeFMIand
the MAAS to measure mindfulness and its relationship with nancial desire
discrepancy, a correlate of subjective well-being. They found that only the
FMI predicted a reduction in nancial desire discrepancy.
In light of such ndings, researchers should evaluate, both qualitatively
and quantitatively, the content, structure, and psychometric properties of the
various mindfulness measures that currently exist, with the hopes of iden-
tifying or developing one primary instrument. In addition, more research
should be conducted to explore and extend mindfulness’s nomological net-
work, identifying additional antecedents, correlates, and consequences that
are associated with the construct. Doing so would not only facilitate individ-
ual studies on mindfulness and its eects but would also allow for an even-
tual meta-analysis on the construct and its relationships, a valuable endeavor
that would be unrealistic with the current inconsistent operationalizations
of mindfulness but that could shed substantial light on the construct and its
utility in the workplace.
How Does Mindfulness in the Workplace Impact Employee Behavior and
Although a number of studies have investigated the general benets of mind-
fulness for individual health, well-being, and emotional balance (see above),
fewer have explored the specic performance results that mindfulness pro-
duces in a workplace setting. Based on the few studies that have been con-
ducted, there is good reason to believe that mindful employees are more en-
gaged, productive, and eective. For example, Krishnakumar and Robinson
(2015) recently found that part-time employees with higher levels of dis-
positional mindfulness were less Machiavellian, were less prone to hostile
feelings in the workplace, and engaged in fewer counterproductive work be-
haviors. As noted earlier, Dane and Brummel (2014) discovered a positive
relationship between workplace mindfulness and job performance among
restaurant servers working in a fast-paced service environment. Similarly,
Reb, Narayanan, and Chaturvedi (2012) found that mindful supervisors had
a positive impact on their employees’ well-being and performance. Finally,
Bond and Bunce (2003) found that employees’ willingness to accept their
thoughts and emotions predicted better mental health and work perfor-
mance a year later. The results to date are promising, but more research is
needed to explore the impact of mindfulness on a wide range of workplace
outcomes, including creativity, innovation, teamwork, learning, reactions to
change, turnover, and performance.
It is also worth noting that despite these initial promising results, some
researchers recently expressed concerns that mindfulness training may ac-
tually yield unintended results for the organization that do not actually fall
in line with organizational goals. Specically, Glomb et al. (2012)notedthat
mindfulness training might decrease the automaticity with which employ-
ees do their work. Although this is benecial in some situations requiring
increased conscientiousness (e.g., high-risk decisions), in more mundane
work tasks it may have the result of slowing down employee production.
Ericson, Kjonstad, and Barstad (2014) issued a similar caution, suggesting
that as mindfulness encourages employees to act in line with their values
and interests, they may elicit behaviors that are not in the best interest of
organizational performance. For instance, mindfulness may help employees
realize that they should not overburden themselves with extra work duties,
should have a more relaxed approach to work, and/or should spend more
time with their family as opposed to their work responsibilities. Therefore,
it is possible that mindfulness may not facilitate bottom-line organizational
594 . .
it is also important to understand the impact that mindfulness has on em-
ployees working in variety of work environments, industries, and settings. By
determining the boundary conditions of this new construct, researchers and
practitioners will have a better understanding of when and how mindfulness
Is Mindfulness Good for Everyone?
As noted above, mindfulness has been shown to produce a number of psy-
chological, physiological, and performance-related benets. However, it is
not known whether mindfulness benets some people more than others—
that is, whether individual dierence variables impact the ecacy of mind-
fulness interventions. Future studies should seek to understand how mind-
fulness training interacts with various individual dierence variables, in-
cluding personality traits, dispositions, and mental models. For example, it is
conceivable that mindfulness training may benet people with certain per-
sonality proles (e.g., those with elevated neuroticism or conscientiousness
levels) more than others. It is also conceivable that the practice of mind-
fulness may not benet certain individuals (in fact, it may even frustrate
or upset some). By identifying and exploring possible interactions between
mindfulness and other individual dierence variables, researchers and prac-
titioners will have a better understanding of when, and with whom, to utilize
mindfulness training and interventions.
In a similar vein, it is possible that cultural dierences may impact
the success of mindfulness programs when implemented internationally or
with employees who hail from international backgrounds. Supportive of this
consideration is the fact that Christopher et al. (Christopher, Charoensuk,
Gilbert, Neary, & Pearce, 2009; Christopher, Christopher, & Charoensuk,
2009) found that Eastern (Thai) and Western (American) conceptualiza-
tions of mindfulness may have important dierences. The authors suggest
that this may be a result of the Buddhist versus secular associations with the
construct in each culture, respectively. It is further important to note that
this dierence has implications for how mindfulness trainees from various
cultures and/or countries would react to mindfulness interventions. In to-
day’s increasingly globalized workplace, this is an important consideration to
take into account prior to designing or implementing a mindfulness training
program, particularly in an organization with international oces and/or
expatriates working in a culture other than their own.
Is It Appropriate to Introduce Mindfulness Into the Workplace?
In recent years, a small but growing number of mindfulness practitioners and
researchers have started questioning the ethics of implementing mindfulness
programs in corporate environments. Various concerns have been raised.
For example, some scholars and practitioners lament the secularization and
commoditization of a spiritual practice that—in Buddhist tradition—is in-
tended to do more than reduce stress or increase productivity. In a recent
Hungton Post article, Ron Purser, a professor of Management at San Fran-
applying mindfulness as a means to awaken individuals and organizations
from the unwholesome roots of greed, ill will and delusion, it is usually be-
ing refashioned into a banal, therapeutic, self-help technique that can ac-
tually reinforce those roots” (Purser & Loy, 2013). Others have argued that
ployees, maintain the status quo, and ultimately manage and manipulate the
workforce (see Carette & King, 2004). Although there are clearly a num-
ber of potential benets associated with the practice of mindfulness, I-O re-
searchers and practitioners should consider these concerns and identify and
explore any potential negative consequences of implementing mindfulness
programs at work.
Through this focal article, we have attempted to raise awareness about a
promising new construct and its potential application in the workplace. Over
the past 2 decades, an increasing number of scholars and practitioners have
explored various ways that mindfulness can benet people both at work and
in their personal lives. A growing body of research shows that mindfulness
can decrease stress, increase mental and physical health and cognitive func-
tioning, and improve performance and well-being. As a result, a number of
organizations have started to implement mindfulness programs for their em-
ployees. But more work is needed to clarify construct denitions and assess-
ments; explore a broader set of antecedents, consequences, mediators, and
moderators; and develop and evaluate the impact of mindfulness interven-
tions and programs in work settings. Our hope is that this article—along with
our colleagues’ responses—sparks new interest and ideas about mindfulness
Allen, M., Bromley, A., Kuyken, W., & Sonnenberg, S. J. (2009). Participants’ experiences
of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. Behavioral and Cognitive Psychotherapy,37,
American Psychological Association. (2014). Stress in America: Are teens adopting adults’
stress habits? Washington, DC: Author.
Anicha, C. L., Ode, S., Moeller, S. K., & Robinson, M. D. (2012). Toward a cognitive view
of trait mindfulness: Distinct cognitive skills predict its observing and nonreactivity
facets. Journal of Personality,80, 255–285.
596 . .
Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empir-
ical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,10, 125–143.
Baer, R. A., & Lykins, E. L. B. (2011). Mindfulness and positive psychological functioning.
In K. Sheldon, T. Kashdan, & M. Steger (Eds.), Designing the future of positive psychol-
ogy: Taking stock and moving forward (pp. 335–348). New York, NY: Oxford University
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report:
The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment,11, 191–206.
Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. (1990). Why change programs don’t produce change.
Harvard Business Review,68, 158–167.
Belzer, F., Schmidt, S., Lucius-Hoene, G., Schneider, J. F., Orellana-Rios, C. L., & Sauer,
S. (2013). Challenging the construct validity of mindfulness assessment—A cog-
nitive interview study of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Mindfulness,4, 33–
Bersin, J. (2014). Spending on corporate training soars: Employee capabilities now
apriority.Forbes.com. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbersin/
Black, D. A. (2014). Mindfulness research publications by year, 1980–2013. Retrieved from
American Mindfulness Research Association website: https://goamra.org/
Bodhi, B. (1994). The noble eightfold path: The way to the end of suering. Onalaska, WA:
BPS Pariyatti Editions.
Bodner, T., & Langer, E. (2001, August). Individual dierences in mindfulness: The Langer
Mindfulness Scale. Poster presented at the annual convention of the American Psycho-
logical Society, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Bond, F. W., & Bunce, D. (2003). The role of acceptance and job control in mental health,
job satisfaction, and work performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,88, 1057–
Bond, F. W., Hayes, S. C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2006). Psychological exibility, ACT and
organizational behavior. In S. C. Hayes, F. W. Bond, D. Barnes-Holmes, & J. Austin
(Eds.), Acceptance and mindfulness at work: Applying acceptance and commitment ther-
apy and relational frame theory to organizational behavior management (pp. 25–54).
Binghamton, NY: Haworth.
Bowen, S., Chawla, N., & Marlatt, G. A. (2011). Mindfulness-based relapse prevention for
addictive behaviors: A clinician’s guide.NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.
Brown, K. W., Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Alex Linley, A. P., & Orzech, K. (2009). When what
one has is enough: Mindfulness, nancial desire discrepancy, and subjective well-
being. JournalofResearchinPersonality,43, 727–736.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benets of being present: Mindfulness and its role
in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,84, 822–848.
Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations
and evidence for its salutary eects. Psychological Inquiry,18, 211–237.
Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., Creswell, J. D., & Niemiec, C. P. (2008). Beyond me: Mindful
responses to social threat. In H. A. Wayment & J. J. Bauer (Eds.), Transcending self-
interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego (pp. 75–84). Washington, DC: Amer-
ican Psychological Association.
Buchheld, N., Grossman, P., & Walach, H. (2001). Measuring mindfulness in insight med-
itation (vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: The development of the
Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Journal for Meditation and Meditation Re-
Burke, W. W., & Biggart, N. W. (1997). Interorganizational relations.InD.Druckman,
J. E. Singer, & H. Van Cott (Eds.), Enhancing organizational performance (pp. 120–149).
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Carette, J., & King, R. (2004). Selling spirituality: The silent takeover of religion.NewYork,
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source
versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
Chambers, R., Lo, B., & Allen, N. B. (2008). The impact of intensive mindfulness training
on attentional control, cognitive style, and aect. Cognitive Therapy and Research,32,
Chaskalson, M. (2011). The mindful workplace: Developing resilient individuals and resonant
organizations with MBSR. Oxford, United Kingdom: Wiley.
Chiesa, A., & Serretti, A. (2010). A systematic review of neurobiological and clin-
ical features of mindfulness meditations. Psychological Medicine,40, 1239–
Christopher, M. S., Charoensuk, S., Gilbert, B. D., Neary, T. J., & Pearce, K. L. (2009). Mind-
fulness in Thailand and the United States: A case of apples versus oranges? Journal of
Clinical Psychology,65, 590–612.
Christopher, M. S., Christopher, V., & Charoensuk, S. (2009). Assessing “Western” mindful-
ness among Thai Therav¯
ada Buddhist monks. Mental Health, Religion & Culture,12,
Chu, L. C. (2010). The benets of meditation vis-à-vis emotional intelligence, perceived
stress and negative mental health. Stress and Health,26, 169–180.
Cohen, S., & Janicki-Deverts, D. (2012). Who’s stressed? Distributions of psychological
stress in the United States in probability samples from 1983, 2006, and 2009. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology,42(6), 1320–1334.
Corporate Leadership Council. (2005). Realizing the full potential of rising talent.Washing-
ton, DC: Corporate Leadership Council.
Creswell, J. D., Way, B. M., Eisenberger, N. I., & Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Neural correlates
of dispositional mindfulness during aect labeling. Psychosomatic Medicine,69, 560–
Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its eects on task performance in the
workplace. Journal of Management,37, 997–1018.
Dane, E., & Brummel, B. J. (2014). Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to
job performance and turnover intention. Human Relations,67, 105–128.
& Sheridan, J. F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mind-
fulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine,65, 564–570.
Ericson, T., Kjonstad, B. G., & Barstad, A. (2014). Mindfulness and sustainability. Ecological
Farb, N. S., Anderson, A. K., Mayberg, H., Bean, J., McKeon, D., & Segal, Z. V. (2010). Mind-
ing one’s emotions: Mindfulness training alters the neural expression of sadness. Emo-
Felder, J. N., Dimidjian, S., & Segal, Z. (2012). Collaboration in mindfulness-based cognitive
therapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology,68, 179–186.
Fiol, C., & O’Connor, E. J. (2003). Waking up! Mindfulness in the face of bandwagons.
Academy of Management Review,28, 54–70.
598 . .
Forte, M., Brown, D. P., & Dysart, M. (1987). Dierences in experience among mindfulness
meditators. Imagination, Cognition & Personality,7(1), 47–60.
Foureur, M., Besley, K., Burton, G., Yu, N., & Crisp, J. (2013). Enhancing the resilience
sense of coherence and decreased depression, anxiety and stress. Contemporary Nurse:
A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession,45, 114–125.
Galantino, M., Baime, M., Maguire, M., Szapary, P. O., & Farrar, J. T. (2005). Association of
psychological and physiological measures of stress in health-care professionals dur-
ing an 8-week mindfulness meditation program: Mindfulness in practice. Stress &
Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress,21, 255–
Gelles, D. (2012). Mindful work: How meditation is changing business from the inside out.
New York, NY: Houghton Miin Harcourt.
Glomb, T. M., Duy, M. K., Bono, J. E., & Yang, T. (2012). Mindfulness at work. Research in
Personnel and Human Resource Management,30, 115–157.
Grossman, P. (2008). On measuring mindfulness in psychosomatic and psychological re-
search. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,64, 405–408.
Gunaratana, B. H. (2011). Mindfulness in plain English. Boston. MA: Wisdom.
Hafenbrack, A. C., Kinias, Z., & Barsade, S. G. (2014). Debiasing the mind through medi-
tation: Mindfulness and the sunk-cost bias. Psychological Science,25, 369–376.
Hanh, T. H. (1976, December 16). The miracle of mindfulness. Boston, MA: Wisdom.
Harrington, E. (2014). NIH has spent $100.2 million on mindfulness meditation.
Washington Free Beacon.Retrievedfromhttp://freebeacon.com/issues/nih-has-spent
Hayes, S. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy and the new behavior therapies:
Mindfulness, acceptance and relationship. In S. C. Hayes, V. M. Follette, & M. M. Line-
han (Eds.), Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding the cognitive-behavioral traditions
(pp. 1–29). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hayes, S. C. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., Bunting, K., Twohig, M., & Wilson, K. G. (2004). What
is acceptance and commitment therapy? In S. C. Hayes & K. D. Strosahl (Eds.), A
practical guide to acceptance and commitment therapy (pp. 1–30). New York, NY:
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An
experiential approach to behavior change.NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.
Herndon, F. (2008). Testing mindfulness with perceptual and cognitive factors: External vs.
internal encoding and the cognitive failures questionnaire. Personality and Individual
Hogan, J., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2010). Management derailment. In S. Zedeck (Ed.),
American Psychological Association handbook of industrial and organizational psychol-
ogy (Vol. 3, pp. 555–575). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hölzel, B. K., Carmody, J., Vangel, M., Congleton, C., Yerramsetti, S. M., Gard, T., & Lazar,
S. W. (2011). Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter den-
sity. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging,191, 36–43.
Howell, A. J., & Buro, K. (2011). Relations among mindfulness, achievement-related self-
regulation, and achievement motivations. Journal of Happiness Studies,12(6), 1007–
Hülsheger, U. R., Alberts, H. M., Feinholdt, A., & Lang, J. B. (2013). Benets of mindfulness
at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology,98, 310–325. doi:10.1037/a0031313
(2014). The power of presence: The role of mindfulness at work for daily levels and
change trajectories of psychological detachment and sleep quality. Journal of Applied
Irving, J. A., Dobkin, P. L., & Park, J. (2009). Cultivating mindfulness in health care profes-
sionals: a review of empirical studies of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR).
Complementary Therapy Clinical Practice,15(2), 61–66.
Jensen, C., Vangkilde, S., Frokjaer, V., & Hasselbalch, S. G. (2012). Mindfulness training af-
fects attention—Or is it attentional eort? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
Jha, A. P., Krompinger, J., & Baime, M. J. (2007). Mindfulness training modies subsystems
of attention. Cognitive, Aective, & Behavioral Neuroscience,7, 109–119.
Jha, A. P., Stanley, E. A., Kiyonaga, A., Wong, L., & Gelfand, L. (2010). Examining the pro-
tective eects of mindfulness training on working memory capacity and aective ex-
perience. Emotion,10, 54–64.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1982). An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain pa-
tients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: Theoretical considerations and
preliminary results. General Hospital Psychiatry,4, 33–47.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your mind to face stress,
pain, and illness.NewYork,NY:Dell.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2005). Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2011). Some reections on the origins of MBSR, skillful means, and the
trouble with maps. Contemporary Buddhism,12(1), 281–306.
Kabat-Zinn, J., Lipworth, L., & Burney, R. (1985). The clinical use of mindfulness medita-
tion for the self-regulation of chronic pain. JournalofBehavioralMedicine,8(2), 163–
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement
at work. Academy of Management Journal,33, 692–724.
Kelly, C. (2012, April 28). O.K., Google, take a deep breath. New York Times. Retrieved from
Nalibo, B. D. (2011). Impact of mindfulness-based stress reduction training on in-
trinsic brain connectivity. NeuroImage,56, 290–298.
Klatt, M. D., Buckworth, J., & Malarkey, W. B. (2008). Eects of low-dose mindfulness-based
stress reduction (MBSR-ld) on working adults. Health Education & Behavior,36, 601–
Krasner, M. S., Epstein, R. M., Beckman, H., Suchman, A. L., Mooney, C. J., & Quill,
T. E. (2009). Association of an educational program in mindful communication with
burnout, empathy, and attitudes among primary care physicians. Journal of the Amer-
ican Medical Association,302, 1284–1293.
Krishnakumar, S., & Robinson, M. D. (2015, March 16). Maintaining an even keel: An aect-
mediated model of mindfulness and hostile work behavior. Emotion.Advanceonline
600 . .
Kristeller, J. L. (2003). Mindfulness, wisdom and eating: Applying a multi-domain model
of meditation eects. Journal of Constructivism in the Human Sciences,8(2), 107–
(2008). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to prevent relapse in recurrent depres-
sion. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,76, 966–978.
Langer, E. J. (1989a). Mindfulness.Cambridge,MA:DaCapo.
Langer, E. J. (1989b). Minding matters: The consequences of mindlessness-mindfulness.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,22, 137–173.
Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000). Mindfulness research and the future. Journal of
Social Issues,56, 129–139.
Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2002). The construct of mindfulness. Journal of Social Is-
(2006). The Toronto Mindfulness Scale: Development and validation. Journal of Clin-
ical Psychology,62, 1445–1467.
Lee, R. A. (2012). Accelerating the development and mitigating derailment of high poten-
tials through mindfulness training. The Industrial–Organizational Psychologist,49, 23–
Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Dimitrova, N. G., & Sels, L. (2013). Mindfulness, authentic functioning,
andworkengagement:Agrowthmodelingapproach.Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Levy, D. M., Wobbrock, J. O., Kaszniak, A. W., & Ostergren, M. (2012, May). The
eects of mindfulness meditation training on multitasking in a high-stress infor-
mation environment. Paper presented at Graphics Interface Conference, Toronto,
Linehan, M. M. (1993). Cognitive behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Lopez, D. S., Jr. (2001). The story of Buddhism: A concise guide to its history and teachings.
New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Malarkey, W. B., Jarjoura, D., & Klatt, M. (2013). Workplace based mindfulness practice and
inammation: A randomized trial. Brain Behavior and Immunity,27, 145–154.
McCall, M. W. (1998). High yers: Developing the next generation of leaders.Boston,MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
McCall, M. W., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The lessons of experience: How
successful executives develop on the job.NewYork,NY:FreePress.
McCraty, R. M. (2003). Impact of a workplace stress reduction program on blood pressure
and emotional health in hypertensive employees. Journal of Alternative and Comple-
mentary Medicine,9, 355–369.
Modinos, G., Ormel, J., & Aleman, A. (2010). Individual dierences in dispositional mind-
fulness and brain activity involved in reappraisal of emotion. Social Cognitive and Af-
fective Neuroscience,5, 369–377.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (1999). Stress ...at work (NIOSH
Publication No. 99–101). Washington, DC: Author.
Nyaniponika. (1973). The heart of Buddhist meditation.NewYork,NY:WeiserBooks.
cek, I., Mommersteeg, P. C., Van Beugen, S., Ramakers, C., & Van Boxtel, G. J. (2013).
Mindfulness-based stress reduction and physiological activity during acute stress: A
randomized controlled trial. Health Psychology,32, 1110–1113.
Oman, D., Richards, T. A., Hedberg, J., & Thoresen, C. E. (2008). Passage meditation im-
proves caregiving self-ecacy among health professionals: A randomized trial and
qualitative assessment. JournalofHealthPsychology,13, 1119–1135.
Orzech, K. M., Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K., & McKay, M. (2009). Intensive mindfulness
training-related changes in cognitive and emotional experience. Journal of Positive Psy-
Plante, T. G. (2010). Contemplative practices in action: Spirituality, meditation and health.
Santa Barbara, CA: ABD-CLIO.
Porras, J. L., & Roberston, P. J. (1983). Organization development: Theory, practice, and re-
search. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), The handbook of industrial and or-
ganizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 719–822). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists
Purser, R., & Loy, D. (2013, July 1). Beyond McMindfulness. The Hungton
Post. Retrieved from http://www.hungtonpost.com/ron-purser/beyond-
Rahula, W. S. (1974). What the Buddha taught.NewYork,NY:GrovePress.
Reb, J., Narayanan, J., & Chaturvedi, S. (2012). Leading mindfully: Two studies on the inu-
ence of supervisor trait mindfulness on employee well-being and performance. Mind-
Roeser, R. W., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Jha, A., Cullen, M., Wallace, L., Wilensky, R., . . .
Harrison, J. (2013). Mindfulness training and reductions in teacher stress and burnout:
Results from two randomized, waitlist-control eld trials. Journal of Educational Psy-
Rosch, E. (2007). More than mindfulness: When you have a tiger by the tail, let it eat you.
Psychological Inquiry,18, 258–265.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology,21, 600–619.
Sauter, S. L., Murphy, L. R., & Hurrell, J. J., Jr. (1990). Prevention of work-related psycholog-
ical disorders. American Psychologist,45(10), 1146–1153.
Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy
for depression: A new approach to relapse prevention.NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.
Seligman, M. E. (2006). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life.NewYork,
NY: Vintage Books.
Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindful-
ness. Journal of Clinical Psychology,62, 373–386.
Smith, H., & Novak, P. (2004). Buddhism: A concise introduction. San Francisco, CA: Harper-
Teper, R., & Inzlicht, M. (2014). Mindful acceptance dampens neuroaective reac-
tions to external and rewarding performance feedback. Emotion,14(1): 105–114.
Thondup, T. (1996). The healing power of mind. London, United Kingdom: Penguin.
Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmuller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt, S. (2006). Mea-
suring mindfulness—The Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Personality and In-
dividual Dierences,40, 1543–1555.
Williams, K. (2006). Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in a worksite wellness
program. In R. A. Baer (Ed.), Mindfulness-based treatment approaches: Clinician’s
guide to evidence base and applications (pp. 361–376). Burlington, MA: Academic
602 . .
Wolever, R. Q., Bobinet, K. J., McCabe, K., Mackenzie, E. R., Fekete, E., Kusnick, C. A., &
Baime, M. (2012). Eective and viable mind-body stress reduction in the workplace:
Arandomizedcontrolledtrial.Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,17, 246–
Zeidan, F., Johnson, S. K., Diamond, B. J., David, Z., & Goolkasian, P. (2010). Mindfulness
meditation improves cognition: Evidence of brief mental training. Consciousness and
Cognition: An International Journal,19, 597–605.