Improving Workplace Mental Health
Burnout is real, but how do we address it?
Posted July 30, 2019 | Reviewed by Devon Frye
Lately, there have been indications of greater attention to mental health in the workplace. This is welcomed by many employers who understand that improving mental health in the workplace is good for business. It is estimated that businesses lose more than $190 billion each year because of absenteeism and lost productivity related to employee mental health problems.
There have been two important and noteworthy developments acknowledging the problems of mental health in the workplace. In April, the California legislature passed a bill authorizing the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission “to establish a framework and voluntary standard for mental health in the workplace that serves to reduce mental health stigma , increase public, employee, and employer awareness of the recovery goals of the Mental Health Services Act, and provide guidance to California’s employer community to put in place strategies and programs, determined by the commission, to support the mental health and wellness of employees. (California Senate Bill 1113).”
While some critics complain that the voluntary nature of the bill prevents it from having real teeth, to date several large companies have signed on, including Sutter Health, Bank of America, Walgreens, and Levi Strauss and Co. The initial task of the commission is to create a set of standards for promoting workplace mental health. This includes developing human resource education and training programs, identifying innovative programs in mental health, and identifying and developing prevention and early intervention programs.
In May of this year, the World Health Organization (WHO) included “burn-out” in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as an occupational phenomenon in the section of factors influencing health status or contact with health services. This is not a diagnosable disease, but it is a syndrome resulting from chronic work stress . Previous versions of the ICD mentioned burnout, and the new revision more specifically defines burnout as characterized by three dimensions:
In further defining occupational burnout, the WHO increases the likelihood that medical personnel will recognize the syndrome, and researchers may focus more on the problem. As a next step, WHO has announced that they are about to embark on the development of evidence-based guidelines on mental health in the workplace.
Last year, Gallup polled 7,500 workers and found that 23 percent of workers reported feeling burned out very often or always, while another 44 percent reported feeling burned out sometimes. A survey by Deloitte of 1,000 U.S. professionals found that 77 percent of employees reported having felt burnout at their current job. They noted that burnout was a problem even with employees who were passionate about their work. One-fourth of respondents indicated that their company did not offer any programs to prevent or reduce burnout.
The three largest drivers of burnout according to respondents were:
One clear conclusion is that most of us either have or will experience workplace burnout. Modern “conveniences” we depend upon may be fueling increases in workplace burnout. Cell phones, text messaging, and email can create an expectation that we are available for workplace questions and concerns 24/7. Our technology has created a digital leash to our job. Readily available internet answers and digital tools have created an expectation for instant results, creating unrealistic expectations of how long a task may take or what results might reasonably be expected. These expectations are just as often self-imposed as imposed by bosses and supervisors.
While we are waiting for the results from the California Commission and from WHO on evidence-based guidelines for workplace mental health programming, there are many steps employers can take to improve the workplace environment and the mental health of their employees. Most companies offer Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs), which are helpful and provide a resource for employees who are having mental health problems. Often these are viewed by employees as a resource only for people with serious mental health problems. As a result, utilization is often quite low. An effective mental health and burnout prevention program works best when it includes a full spectrum of services:
Environment and Culture
An effective and comprehensive approach to employee mental health can be affordable, take little time, and result in a high return on investment as absenteeism and lost productivity go down and as overall employee mental health and well-being improve.
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Sherry Benton, Ph.D., is the founder and Chief Science Officer of TAO Connect, and is also a professor emeritus and the former counseling center director at the University of Florida.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.