I recently attended the 6th MAD (Make a Difference) World International Summit in October 2023 in London and took in the workplace health and wellbeing narrative. It was clear to see from the suppliers sporting their wares and the panellists highlighting their opinions, that data is fundamental to a strategy and return on investment when it comes to the wellbeing of the workforce.
Dozens of suppliers were on hand to demonstrate their latest technology which generate snazzy dashboards to illustrate the data analysed and where there might be issues within an organisation. But what of this data? It is really only reflecting the input and is only inclusive to those that engage with the technology, which is unlikely to be capturing the majority of workforce.
What is paradoxical is that all the health and wellbeing data you need is already likely to be in an organisation. There are many indicators that point to the issues to be, or in some cases, not to be tackled and are likely to reflect the whole of the workforce.
suspect indicators
Data can be captured from dozens of processes in a business, the obvious port of call is absence data. With various methods of how to record and calculate, all potentially generating a different result, it is fair to say that absenteeism can be perceived as a huge cost to an organisation. What is most alarming about absenteeism, however, is that it is not a clear liabilities line on a profit-and-loss balance sheet. It is very rare that the true cost of absenteeism, let alone from ill health, is realised by an organisation.
Presenteeism is also cited as a cost to business – the loss in productivity due an employee not performing at 100% capacity. This too is hard to measure accurately, and it is reliant on employees self-reporting and is quite subjective. The added aspect is that not all presenteeism is bad for an organisation or an individual. There is research that suggests functional and therapeutic presenteeism can aid a return to full fitness and not burden others with more work.
The “measure what you treasure” narrative is easier said than done.
consultative indicators
With quantifying accurate data from the go to indictors, proving difficult, there is a strong argument to seek qualitative and consultative information to uncover what is happening in an organisation.
Qualitative data is often used in research to provide rich and detailed insights from a participant’s point of view and there are plenty of opportunities for organisations to collect such data.
Leaveism
Defined by Dr Ian Hesketh in 2013, aspects of leaveism is the practice of working outside of working hours including weekends and annual leave. Unable to leave work. With the onset of smartphones and an increase in working from home since the pandemic, leaveism has been on the increase and organisations know it. However, this in the long run doesn’t bode well for either party and is far from free work as it can be perceived by an organisation. It is a sure sign of over working and potential burnout. IT departments generally have the tools to be able to establish who is working out of hours and would be a good place to start analysing trends and interventions.
Appraisals
Often dreaded by both employees and employers, appraisals can be good, bad and sometimes, downright ugly. However, they offer valuable insights into culture, performance and job satisfaction of a workforce. Usually, ratings and feedback are noted and can be used as a barometer as to how employees are feeling about their work and employer. Importantly, the work and relationships are often discussed at this point. These are probably the two notorious causes of workplace stress and organisational injustice and can be priceless. Trends can be gleaned from high, medium, and low performers as to where potential risks could be lying in the organisation. A department with skewed results is worth investigating as well departments with high attrition.
exit interviews
Typically, under-rated by organisations and can be seen as a waste of time, if carried out purposefully and honestly, exit interviews can be gold dust to an organisation. As a former in-house recruiter, I would always personally seek out why someone was leaving the company I worked for. I would do this as an impartial and confidential third party as in most cases, I was perceived as a neutral colleague. The reason why someone has made the ultimate decision to move on from an organisation can not be underestimated, even if the perception is that it is untrue. Whilst confidentiality is critical, information shared can be utilised to understand why an employee has rejected their employer and decided that the grass is greener elsewhere.
to conclude…
Each organisation is different and might wish to tackle different aspects of wellbeing. I believe that most organisations try to do the right thing by their employees, however, are often misguided. Consulting with the workforce is possibly the most valuable action an organisation can take, followed hotly by acting on what is learned from consultation. As I was once advised in a company induction of a global organisation, the answer to your question lies within the business, the challenge is finding who has the answer in the business. Look hard enough, the answers are there.
Author: Stuart Mace – EFS Volunteers’ Hub Lead
Photo credit: iStock
