Rethinking workplace wellbeing: Why individual interventions fall short

The modern workplace demands more from employees than ever before, and the burden on mental health can be significant. In response, many organisations are increasingly embracing individual-level interventions like mindfulness training and wellbeing apps. However, recent research by the Wellbeing Research Centre at the University of Oxford* casts doubt on the effectiveness of these approaches in isolation.

The study, involving over 46,000 workers across 233 organisations, explored the impact of various individual wellbeing interventions on participants' mental health. Surprisingly, the researchers found no significant difference in mental well-being between participants and non-participants of these interventions. This finding challenges the prevalent notion that individual-level interventions are the answer to improving worker well-being. While there is a positive consensus in the field about their potential benefits, the research suggests limited impact on crucial outcomes like mental health.

Instead, the research highlights the importance of organisational change alongside individual interventions. The focus should shift from "changing the worker" to "changing the workplace."

Here's why individual-level interventions may fall short

• Inadequate Addressing of Work Conditions: Critics argue that these interventions often fail to address the root causes of stress and poor mental health, which often lie in workplace factors like demanding workloads, ineffective management practices, or poor job design. Simply teaching employees coping mechanisms doesn't address the source of the problem.

• Shifting of Responsibility: By promoting individual-level interventions alone, the narrative can inadvertently shift responsibility for mental health onto the employee. This can create a "toxic side effect" by implying that stress is the individual's fault and solely manageable by individual efforts.

• Limited Effectiveness: The study reveals that individual interventions may not be powerful enough to counteract the negative impacts of demanding work environments. They may not equip individuals with the necessary resources to manage unrealistic pressures or balance heavy job demands.

The research emphasises the greater benefits of implementing individual interventions in tandem with organisational interventions such as:

• • Changes in scheduling and workload management

  • Improved management practices

  • Increased staff resources

  • Performance review reforms

  • Job redesign

These interventions directly address the work environment and its potential negative impact on mental health. While individual interventions play a role, they should be supplementary to, not instead of, comprehensive organisational changes.

Moving forward

• • Focus on preventative structural changes. Invest in workplace redesign and management practices that promote well-being rather than solely relying on individual coping strategies.

  • Ensure high-quality intervention implementation. If individual interventions are used, ensure they are well-designed, evidence-based, and implemented effectively.

  • Embrace a holistic approach. Recognize the interplay between individual and organisational factors impacting mental health, and address both levels concurrently.

By shifting the focus from quick fixes to long-term, systemic changes, organisations can create a sustainable and impactful approach to employee well-being.

This approach requires a collective effort from leadership, line managers, and employees alike. By prioritising supportive work environments alongside well-designed interventions, organisations can foster a culture of well-being that benefits both individuals and the organisation as a whole.

WorkLife Digital is a global mental-wellbeing consultancy driven by the mission to improve the sustainability of businesses. Our psychological wellbeing tool, Worklife Quotient (WL-Q), is modelled on cutting-edge scientific research and provides organisation-wide measurement and intelligence on the mental wellbeing levels and psychological resilience of staff. WL-Q also assesses the impact of organisational practices (i.e. people and culture, leadership styles, organisational purpose and values, social impact) that have a direct influence on staff wellbeing and provides strategic recommendations on addressing risks and promoting strengths.

For more information, get in touch at lisa@worklife.digital

Follow us on LinkedIn if you want to know more about current and upcoming mental wellbeing updates and regulations.

References

*Fleming, W. J. (2023). Employee well‐being outcomes from individual‐level mental health interventions: Cross‐sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Industrial Relations Journal, 1–21