*image from www.td.com
Now Reading | Corporate mindfullness is bullsh*t: Zen or no Zen, you’re working harder and being paid less. (—from Salon)
This article is long and intense but I appreciated the perspective as an employer and business owner. Authors Ronald Purser and Edwin Ng say that mindfullness matters, “but make no mistake: corporations are co-opting the idea to disguise the ways they kill us.” I have my own opinions, but I was curious on their take. I have pulled out some key excerpts to their argument below.
To begin, mindfullness is defined this way:
Noun: a mental state achieved by focusing one’s awareness on the present moment, while calmly acknowledging and accepting one’s feelings, thoughts, and bodily sensations, used as a therapeutic technique.
From greatergood.berkeley.edu:
Though it has its roots in Buddhist meditation, a secular practice of mindfulness has entered the American mainstream in recent years, in part through the work of Jon Kabat-Zinn and his Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program, which he launched at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in 1979. Since that time, thousands of studies have documented the physical and mental health benefits of mindfulness in general and MBSR in particular, inspiring countless programs to adapt the MBSR model for schools, prisons, hospitals, veterans centers, and beyond.
Jon Kabat-Zinn says that “It’s not really about sitting in the full lotus, like pretending you’re a statue in a British museum,” he says in this Greater Good video. “It’s about living your life as if it really mattered, moment by moment by moment by moment.”
Why are corporations so concerned about mindfullness?
To consider only the corporate sector: with over $300 billion in losses due to stress-related absences, and nearly $550 billion in losses due to a lack of “employee engagement,” it is unsurprising why it has jumped on the mindfulness bandwagon. Such losses in production and efficiency threaten the logic of profit-making. For capitalism to survive, as Nicole Ashoff points out in “The New Prophets of Capital,” “people must willingly participate in and reproduce its structures and norms,” and in times of crisis, “capitalism must draw upon cultural ideas that exist outside of the circuits of profit-making.” Mindfulness is one such new cultural idea serving this purpose.
This story broke my heart:
What might we make, then, of the incident where a 21-year-old Bank of America Merrill Lynch intern died of an epileptic seizure after working 72 hours straight? In the wake of the incident, Goldman Sachs announced new rules to cap the intern workday at 17 hours. Where was mindful leadership prior to the introduction of the new rules? And with the implementation of the workday cap—17 hours—are we witnessing mindful leadership? Who or what is really benefiting from a reduction in stress and aggressiveness within the financial community, as it proudly declares its embracing of mindfulness? Was it the intern’s own fault that he died? Was the stress he faced self-imposed? Was his tragic death a consequence of failing to work mindfully?
In the article the authors talk about a recent Stanford-Harvard study and some of its interesting findings.
A meta-analysis of 228 studies showed that employee stress is not self-imposed nor due to a lack of mindfulness. On the contrary, major workplace stressors were associated with a lack of health insurance, threats of constant layoffs and job insecurity, lack of discretion and autonomy in decision-making, long work hours, low organizational justice, and unrealistic job demands. Yet, individualized mindfulness programs pay virtually no attention to how stress is shaped by a complex set of interacting power relations, networks of interests, and explanatory narratives. Carl Cederstrom and Andre Spicer argue in “The Wellness Syndrome” that the mindfulness movement exemplifies an ideological shift, which turns an obsessive focus on wellness and happiness into a moral imperative. This “biomorality” urges the individual to find responsibility via the “right” life choices—whether through exercise, food, or meditation—to optimize the self.
According to the article, proponents of mindfullness have this perspective:
Proponents like Jeremy Hunter, however, assure us that mindfulness can act as a “disruptive technology,” reforming even the most dysfunctional companies into kinder, more compassionate and sustainable organizations. Corporate mindfulness teachers who claim that individualized mindfulness programs are subversive often evoke a ‘Trojan horse’ metaphor. They speculate that over time, leaders, managers and employees trained in mindfulness may wake up and effect major transformations in corporate policies and practices. Going by their claim, Goldman Sachs, Monsanto and General Mills, companies that have publicized their successful corporate mindfulness programs, will soon become the poster children for socially and ecologically responsible corporations.
The effects of mindfullness are truly unknown and unproven so far. Here are some quotes from prominent commentators:
“Leaders touched by mindfulness may find innovations to solve real problems and help make a better life.Who knows what a leader—in workplaces from Ford Motor Company to the Los Angeles Fire Department—might do for the greater good with the aid of a little mindfulfulness?” —Barry Boyce
“Mindfulness can be a great boon….widespread meditation practice could make a real difference to the problems of our age. But while some people may be drawn to practice through the scientific promise of betterment, they may end up finding that once they’ve got started, the path is far more interesting than that.” — Ed Halliwell
“And then there’s the possibility that enhanced awareness may result in a disconnect between personal and organizational values. If that happens, of course, an employee might simply leave to find a better fit. On the other hand, if an organization can work creatively with the questions that increased personal awareness can churn up, that could be a great asset.” —Jeremy Hunter
“I think what it [mindfulness] can do, hopefully, is give individuals, influencers of organizations, and may be even companies themselves the perspective that’s needed to make decisions and changes, even, that are beneficial, not just to the bottom line but to our emotional, physical, and social well-being.” –David Gelles
The authors last words are these:
But precisely because “who knows?” is an open question where its radical potential lies in its openness, that we underscore repeatedly the need to interrogate the dynamics of power shaping contemporary mindfulness—because change for the common good (rather than change simply for individual benefit or personal wellbeing) must come through the disruption of prevailing systems of inequality, exploitation, and injustice.
I can’t draw a conclusion on how corporations around the world are handling mindfullness and if their intentions are truly pure when it comes to their employees wellbeing or if it is just pure BS as Salon speculates. If you are a part of one of these corporations, you will have to decide that for yourself. I hope employees will have enough sense to establish their own personal boundaries and limitations when it comes to situations like Amazon or Bank of America. Life is too short—I have learned this from personal experience. But regardless, mindfullness as a whole is healthy within the work environment and in our homes. Any state of mind that makes us more keenly aware of life’s moments, that drives us toward loving kindness, or that makes us more observant and balanced is important. At Fierce, we choose to be mindful of ourselves and of each other as a part of our culture.
You can read the entire article here: here: http://www.salon.com/2015/09/27/corporate_mindfulness_is_bullsht_zen_or_no_zen_youre_working_harder_and_being_paid_less/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
Curious if you are a mindful person? Here’s a little quiz: http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/quizzes/take_quiz/4/
