A balanced view of mindfulness at work

IF 3.9 1区 心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organizational Psychology Review Pub Date : 2021-08-04 DOI:10.1177/20413866211036930
Ellen Choi, Jamie A. Gruman, Craig Leonard
{"title":"A balanced view of mindfulness at work","authors":"Ellen Choi, Jamie A. Gruman, Craig Leonard","doi":"10.1177/20413866211036930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mindfulness has grown from an obscure subject to an immensely popular topic that is associated with numerous performance, health, and well-being benefits in organizations. However, this growth in popularity has generated a number of criticisms of mindfulness and a rather piecemeal approach to organizational research and practice on the subject. To advance both investigation and application, the present paper applies The Balance Framework to serve as an integrative scaffolding for considering mindfulness in organizations, helping to address some of the criticisms leveled against it. The Balance Framework specifies five forms of balance: 1) balance as tempered view, 2) balance as mid-range, 3) balance as complementarity, 4) balance as contextual sensitivity, and 5) balance among different levels of consciousness. Each form is applied to mindfulness at work with a discussion of relevant conceptual issues in addition to implications for research and practice. In order to appreciate the value of mindfulness at work researchers and practitioners might want to consider both the benefits and potential drawbacks of mindfulness. This paper presents a discussion of both the advantages and possible disadvantages of mindfulness at work organized in terms of the five dimensions of an organizing structure called The Balance Framework.","PeriodicalId":46914,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Psychology Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866211036930","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Mindfulness has grown from an obscure subject to an immensely popular topic that is associated with numerous performance, health, and well-being benefits in organizations. However, this growth in popularity has generated a number of criticisms of mindfulness and a rather piecemeal approach to organizational research and practice on the subject. To advance both investigation and application, the present paper applies The Balance Framework to serve as an integrative scaffolding for considering mindfulness in organizations, helping to address some of the criticisms leveled against it. The Balance Framework specifies five forms of balance: 1) balance as tempered view, 2) balance as mid-range, 3) balance as complementarity, 4) balance as contextual sensitivity, and 5) balance among different levels of consciousness. Each form is applied to mindfulness at work with a discussion of relevant conceptual issues in addition to implications for research and practice. In order to appreciate the value of mindfulness at work researchers and practitioners might want to consider both the benefits and potential drawbacks of mindfulness. This paper presents a discussion of both the advantages and possible disadvantages of mindfulness at work organized in terms of the five dimensions of an organizing structure called The Balance Framework.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
平衡地看待工作中的正念
正念已经从一个晦涩的主题发展成为一个非常受欢迎的话题,它与组织中的许多绩效、健康和福祉有关。然而,这种受欢迎程度的增长已经产生了一些对正念的批评,以及对该主题的组织研究和实践的相当零碎的方法。为了推进研究和应用,本文将平衡框架作为一个综合框架来考虑组织中的正念,帮助解决一些针对它的批评。平衡框架规定了五种形式的平衡:1)平衡作为温和的观点,2)平衡作为中间范围,3)平衡作为互补性,4)平衡作为上下文敏感性,5)平衡在不同层次的意识。每种形式都应用于工作中的正念,除了对研究和实践的影响外,还讨论了相关的概念问题。为了理解正念在工作中的价值,研究人员和从业者可能需要考虑正念的好处和潜在的缺点。本文从一个叫做“平衡框架”的组织结构的五个维度来讨论正念在工作中的优点和可能的缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
1.60%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Organizational Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by SAGE in partnership with the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. Organizational Psychology Review’s unique aim is to publish original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied psychology, industrial psychology, occupational psychology, organizational behavior, personnel psychology, and work psychology).Articles accepted for publication in Organizational Psychology Review will have the potential to have a major impact on research and practice in organizational psychology. They will offer analyses worth citing, worth following up on in primary research, and worth considering as a basis for applied managerial practice. As such, these should be contributions that move beyond straight forward reviews of the existing literature by developing new theory and insights. At the same time, however, they should be well-grounded in the state of the art and the empirical knowledge base, providing a good mix of a firm empirical and theoretical basis and exciting new ideas.
期刊最新文献
Sustainability champions: A proactive perspective on the inter-organizational job design dynamics of sustainability implementation Multiple Pathways to Leadership: A Revision and Extension of the CIP Leadership Framework More Teams, More Meetings? Toward an Understanding of Multiteam System Meeting Design, Facilitation, and Effectiveness An inconvenient truth about “bundling” commitment, engagement, and embeddedness: Unbundling to extend theory on turnover motivations and beyond Physical Challenge Interventions and the Development of Transferable Skills for the Workplace: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1