This is a phenomena very prevalent in Western organizations as well - a focus on immediately applicable decision/action. But this is also driven by innovation - which in turn is inseparable from risk/uncertainty.

The sense of having control (which often comes with expertise - depending on the nature of expertise - for example a classical musician trained to be 'orchestrated' versus a virtuoso jazz musician comfortable with improvisation) is paradoxically challenged by the creative process and consequences of innovation.

Mindfulness as you know is a 'mind training' leads us to see how all things are 'empty' & impermanent- that is do see that nothing exists in and off itself but rather are consequences of 'inter-being' chains of causes & effect. This in turn lead to the observation that a 'need to control' is an impediment to the creative 'way-finding' that is essential to innovation and actually seizing opportunity with agility.

In a way mindfulness bring a necessary detachment to risks which are fundamental to innovation. For example, a classically trained musician focuses on perfectly controlled performance of an 'orchestrated' work - leading to a type of 'focus' that is able to exclude environment. On the other hand, the jazz musician must trust the agility of his expertise and give up the sense of 'orchestrated control' attending-including variations from the other musicians to seize those moments as opportunities for exploration.

A classical musician 'navigates' a well practised path through the well explored territory of the orchestrated piece, while a jazz musician must be more mindful (including the compassion necessary for trust of others) as they 'way-find' themselves with the others through unexplored territory of the pieces possibilities.

I think it is the jazz musician that represents the future of our innovation-based economy, and mindfulness gives us all more solid base for a richer type of expertise.

The power of community in encouraging beneficial habits of mind is changing as fast as the workplace. Cooperative teamwork toward nurturing mindfulness and increasing awareness on work satisfaction and individual well-being is easy to sense in a variety of work environments. The curriculum for the workplace is complex. Individual perspectives melded into a shared attitude and aptitude that is friendly to all members is common in church communities and has deep historic roots (traditions) and many noted it as our group navigated these waters.

There is magic.

It's hard to think of a limitation of individual mindfulness in today's organization. Especially in the context of the four noble truths. But perhaps it is the lack of sange - the lack of a supportive community. The individual could be drawn to simple detach from the effort to 'change' the organization.

On the other hand - the fundamental rationale for organization in the 21st century (given the ubiquitous digital environment) will be based on the increasing returns that derive from an 'epistemic community' - a community that shares a common language, set of rules (and empowerment to discuss them in relation to rules about changing the rules), and common purposes. Thus the organization of the 21st century will understand that if social media is the medium, then social computing is the message and organizations to be viable, agile and adaptive/evolving will have to be 'programmable'. The sort of epistemic community can become a useful and powerful form of sanga.

Some individuals find it easier to embrace expertise as friend of mindfulness as compared to uncertainty. For example, it is common to find organizations in asian societies focussing on immediate results, which are translated into financials. If uncertainly is key to cultivating mindfulness, how could it be promoted among individuals?

This is a phenomena very prevalent in Western organizations as well - a focus on immediately applicable decision/action. But this is also driven by innovation - which in turn is inseparable from risk/uncertainty.

The sense of having control (which often comes with expertise - depending on the nature of expertise - for example a classical musician trained to be 'orchestrated' versus a virtuoso jazz musician comfortable with improvisation) is paradoxically challenged by the creative process and consequences of innovation.

Mindfulness as you know is a 'mind training' leads us to see how all things are 'empty' & impermanent- that is do see that nothing exists in and off itself but rather are consequences of 'inter-being' chains of causes & effect. This in turn lead to the observation that a 'need to control' is an impediment to the creative 'way-finding' that is essential to innovation and actually seizing opportunity with agility.

In a way mindfulness bring a necessary detachment to risks which are fundamental to innovation. For example, a classically trained musician focuses on perfectly controlled performance of an 'orchestrated' work - leading to a type of 'focus' that is able to exclude environment. On the other hand, the jazz musician must trust the agility of his expertise and give up the sense of 'orchestrated control' attending-including variations from the other musicians to seize those moments as opportunities for exploration.

A classical musician 'navigates' a well practised path through the well explored territory of the orchestrated piece, while a jazz musician must be more mindful (including the compassion necessary for trust of others) as they 'way-find' themselves with the others through unexplored territory of the pieces possibilities.

I think it is the jazz musician that represents the future of our innovation-based economy, and mindfulness gives us all more solid base for a richer type of expertise.

It feels as though there is an ironic twist to the talk of mindfulness at the moment, generally 'out there', & I don't mean to be critical of this site and the comments. Organisations want to have mindful employees, yet they don't appear to really value anything other than the industrial model of results driven by bottom lines. In other words, by all mean be mindful, but in your own time as a form of personal development. And if the organisation gets the benefit then ok! I wonder if this is a type of psych-wash, similar to the green- wash experienced during the rise of ecological concerns. If an organisation has the autonomy to create and encourage mindfulness I believe that is a very meaningful thing, but I hesitate to believe that there are many organisations like that when you get down to the nitty gritty. Sorry to be an old cynic!

Humanity has organised many environments to encourage mindfulness. Consciousness is contagious and travels well. The Health Industry mines this in modern programs and proposals. It might miss spirit but covers body and mind awareness practically.

As far as the topic heading is concerned I think the most serious limitation is that phrase in the question itself - individual mindfulness is not the same as organisational mindfulness. While we may individually be 'mindful in the moment' this mindfulness is in itself constrained by the context of the moment.

For example, encountering discrimination in the workplace (whatever basis you choose - race, faith, gender...) and bneing mindful would result in some form of response, hopefully challenging the discrimination. Would this have any impact on the organisation's discriminatory attitudes? Would it become more accessible for people with disabilities? Would it cease it's exploitation of cheap labour markets abroad?

I would argue that the organisation's mindfulness agenda may not be based on the same morality as its employees.