EHS Congress
Dr Judith Grant, Managing Director at The Wellbeing Exchange says wellbeing interventions need to steer away from a focus on individual health behaviours and prioritise psychosocial risk management instead.
Dr Judith Grant, Managing Director at The Wellbeing Exchange
It was back in 1968 that Robert Kennedy stated that Gross Domestic Product ’measures everything “except that which makes life worthwhile”. GDP measures the value of goods and services produced each year, but it does not follow that an increase in these leads to an increase in wellbeing.
The economics of happiness
GDP doesn’t consider things like social, natural and human capital – all things that improve our lives and contribute to our health and happiness. It seems easier to attribute value to our outputs than how we feel. But how we feel has a direct impact on those outputs.
I have been interested in Wellbeing Economics since hearing Lord Richard Layard speak at a World Mental Health Day event in 2011 on the subject of happiness. I had never heard an economist speak so clearly and passionately about the topics of happiness and wellbeing and present the economic and societal value of them. Up until that point my work in wellbeing had largely focused on individual health behaviours and the benefits of eating well, moving more, drinking less alcohol and not smoking and the benefits to population health.
Lord Layard and his team at the London School of Economics were looking at the economics of happiness and wellbeing, and the research on happiness and work was compelling. The development of this science, alongside other academic research on workplace wellbeing, offers us robust evidence that workplace wellbeing matters.
Recent research from the University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre has been adding to the business case. This year a report from their collaboration with Indeed, the jobs website, analysed over 250 million data points on employee wellbeing through a Work Wellbeing Score (the world’s largest wellbeing data set)[1]. The researchers, led by Professor Jan Emmanuel De Neve, analysed the business performance of US firms in the data set and found that companies with higher wellbeing had higher company valuation, higher return on their assets and greater profits[2].
Fruit baskets
Many organisations are still focusing on the low hanging fruit (quite literally) by offering fruit baskets, yoga classes and one-off talks. Health promotion absolutely has it place in the workplace but focusing budget on generalised initiatives with no understanding of the drivers of wellbeing in the workplace or evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions can erode the business case for wellbeing. Workplace wellbeing hit the headlines last year with the release of a study by Dr William Fleming of University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre[3].
“We shouldn’t confuse wellbeing interventions designed to improve individual health behaviours with psychosocial risk management.”
The study of cross sectional, individual level mental health interventions in the UK workplace concluded that overall, participating in activities such as resilience and stress management training, coaching and mindfulness classes does not improve wellbeing. This is not to say that organisations shouldn’t invest in these areas, but when they do, they should consider the long-term impact and measure effectiveness. The Society of Occupational Medicine laid out the legal, moral and financial arguments for investment in occupational health in their paper Occupational Health the Value Proposition and also concluded that wellbeing strategies must look at workplace culture, relationships and the work environment[4].
We shouldn’t confuse wellbeing interventions designed to improve individual health behaviours with psychosocial risk management. Working as a Head of Health and Wellbeing in organisations I always said we need to manage health risks and create wellbeing opportunities – it isn’t one or the other. The Health and Safety Executive developed the Management Standards for Stress in 2004, and the British Standards Institute brought out BSI 45003 in 2021.
Both offer a clear framework for organisations to measure and manage psychosocial risk in the workplace. This involves looking at the design and organisation of work and understanding the drivers of poor wellbeing. Developing a strategic approach to workplace wellbeing that covers prevention, protection, promotion and support will deliver lasting returns for both the organisation and employees.
So how do you distil the evidence into a compelling business case for leaders?
That is what I will be exploring at EHS Congress in December:
- What is workplace wellbeing and how can organisations measure it effectively?
- Understanding the costs of ill-health and wellbeing and the value of investment.
- How do you present the case to leaders?
- Understanding the determinants of wellbeing in your business and the key areas to focus on to improve health, safety, wellbeing and business performance.
The International Institute of Leadership & Safety Culture’s (IILSC) EHS Congress London is co-located this year with Anticipate London, at ExCel London, on 3-4 London. To register, visit the IILSC website here.
[1] Indeed’s Global Work Wellbeing Report 2024 https://www.indeed.com/employers/work-wellbeing-100
[2] De Neve, J.-E., Kaats, M., & Ward, G. (2023). Workplace wellbeing and firm performance. Wellbeing Research Centre.
[3] Fleming, W. J. (2024). Employee well-being outcomes from individual-level mental health interventions: Cross-sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Industrial Relations Journal, 55, 162–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12418
[4] Nicholson PJ. Occupational health: the value proposition. London. Society of Occupational Medicine. 2022 https://www.som.org.uk/sites/som.org.uk/files/Occupational_Health_The_Value_Proposition_March_2022.pdf
Related Topics
This post was originally published on here
