Rethinking Workplace Well-Being: Individual-Level Interventions Found to Be Ineffective

The adoption of individual-level mental well-being interventions in workplaces faces challenges as recent research questions their effectiveness. A new large-scale survey reveals limited evidence supporting practices like mindfulness, resilience training, and stress management, with indications of potential harm.

Although over half of employers have embraced well-being initiatives, the focus on individual-level interventions raises concerns about their legitimacy, prompting a reevaluation of workplace well-being strategies. The study, published in Industrial Relations Journal, advocates for a shift toward organizational interventions and underscores the need for high-quality implementation to foster employee well-being.

The study advocates for a shift toward organizational interventions and underscores the need for high-quality implementation to foster employee well-being.

Despite a surge in well-being initiatives in the British workplace, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development reports that the majority of employers have primarily focused on individual-level interventions like counseling and stress management. This has sparked debates about the effectiveness of these interventions compared with organizational changes.

Researchers conducted a comprehensive evaluation of various individual-level mental well-being interventions, including mindfulness and resilience training. Contrary to expectations, the study found no significant differences between participants and nonparticipants in well-being outcomes, work environment measures, organizations, or social groups. This challenges the utility of individual-level interventions in improving workers' well-being and questions their place in policy recommendations, emphasizing the need for further experimental research, according to the study.

In this study, the concept of work well-being is approached holistically, considering individuals' subjective experiences of their working lives, with a particular emphasis on mental well-being. The study targets workplace interventions that promote positive mental health and good psychological functioning, distinguishing them from practices addressing subclinical mental illness, such as employee assistance programs and counseling.

While existing evidence in work psychology literature generally supports the positive impact of individual-level interventions on mental well-being, stress reduction, burnout, and job resource improvement, concerns persist regarding methodological limitations. These include issues like heterogeneity in effects, publication bias, attrition, outcomes, and fidelity.

The study utilized data from the Britain's Healthiest Workplace survey, involving 46,336 individuals from 233 organizations. Propensity score analysis was employed to examine the effects of interventions on individual-level well-being outcomes. Results indicated no significant differences in well-being outcomes between participants and nonparticipants across various interventions. Notably, resilience and stress management interventions showed no benefits, while mindfulness interventions had negative estimates for certain outcomes.

These findings challenge the hypothesis that individual-level interventions significantly improve workers' well-being, except for volunteering initiatives, urging a reconsideration of workplace strategies. The study emphasizes the complexity of evaluating these interventions and calls for more nuanced approaches, considering potential biases, and the findings align with studies suggesting ineffectiveness of low-level interventions without structural changes. Volunteering emerges as a potential positive intervention, suggesting that enhancing social resources may be more effective than focusing on psychological skills.

Acknowledging limitations, including cross-sectional data, the study recommends further research, particularly longitudinal and experimental studies. Although the large sample size allows analysis across diverse organizational contexts, the study highlights the need to consider wider structural contexts and addresses the heterogeneity in intervention practices.

The study recommends a shift away from premature recommendations of individual-level interventions for all workers. Instead, it emphasizes the significance of organizational interventions, aligning with the greater benefits of organizational over individual change. High-quality implementation is highlighted as crucial in fostering employee well-being.

This research prompts a reassessment of workplace well-being strategies, exemplifying the need for more comprehensive approaches and organizational changes, the researchers wrote. The findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on what works in promoting employee well-being, advocating for a combination of approaches to enhance job resources and mitigate job demands.

Reference

Fleming WJ. Employee well‐being outcomes from individual‐level mental health interventions: cross‐sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Ind Relat J. Published online January 10, 2024. doi: 10.1111/irj.12418