Reporting Employer Best Practices in Mental Health

bh IN BRIEF

The Great Place to Work Institute Canada worked with Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) on a report that reviewed options and actions to address workplace stress. A voluntary British management system for businesses was used as a model to identify and assess risks, take action, and then monitor progress. The report profiles several ‘brand-name’ and lesser-known Canadian organizations with leading programs and diverse approaches. Those workplaces identified three major benefits to implementing better stress-related policy, processes and practices:
(1) Higher levels of employee health and satisfaction, (2) Improved service quality and client satisfaction, and (3) Better corporate reputation, and brand awareness.

"I think there’s a growing awareness or understanding among business leaders of the cost of mental health in the workplace," says Jennifer Wetherow, director of the Great Place to Work Institute Canada in Kelowna, BC, adding that mental health claims have now overtaken cardiovascular claims as the leading cause of workplace disability in Canada. "Executives have an interest and desire in doing something about it but I’m not sure they know what to do."

Last year, Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) launched an initiative, in cooperation with Great Place to Work Institute, to explore two things: practical solutions to address workplace stress and what employers in Canada are actually doing. The final report, Mental Health in Canadian Workplaces: Investigating Employer’s Best Practices, points across the pond to a voluntary system that’s been implemented in the U.K. to improve the psycho-social wellbeing of workers.

In Great Britain, in contrast to Canada, a single, national body – the Health and Safety Executive looks after workplace health and safety. The HSE has identified six key stressors in the workplace:

Demands: workload, work patterns, and the work environment.
Control: how much say the person has in how they do their work.
Support: the encouragement and resources provided by the organization, its managers, and colleagues.

Graph 1 shows that rate of return of companies recognized as
among the top 100 companies on the GPTW list significantly outperformed the market over a ten year period"
Relationships: to create positive workplaces, avoid conflict, and deal with unacceptable behaviour.
Role: such as whether people understand their purpose at work and whether the organization ensures that they do not have conflicting roles.
Change: such as how transitions or restructuring is managed and communicated.

Organizations may voluntarily adopt the Management Standards. If they do, they‘ll be guided through a five-step cycle including risk identification, then analysis and assessment, followed by evaluation, action planning, and monitoring. "Using the voluntary approach rightly shifts the management of workplace risks to those who most directly create them," says Wetherow. "So it’s not just government regulation of something they [employers] can’t control."

However, like all good ideas developed elsewhere, the British Management Standards must be adapted to a considerably more complicated Canadian system. Here, each province and territory makes its own rules, and they may fall within one of several legal codes – occupational health and safety, human rights, employments standards, etc (see: Doctor on Call). Still, "importing a program…offers an appealing strategy for reducing workplace stress," says Wetherow.

According to the GPTW-HRSDC report, a voluntary program "would side-step any issues associated with jurisdictional authority. Further, it would motivate a more proactive approach to occupational stress in a way that does not conflict with existing legislation."

The report includes profiles of several Canadian companies that are generally adhering to the British Standards, and are on the leading edge of creating positive work environments. Those companies have used various approaches to help employees feel empowered, understand their roles and responsibilities, feel respected by senior management, and have control over their work schedules (see stories below).

The profiled workplaces identified three benefits to implementing better policy, processes and practices. First, better health and satisfaction levels among employees, better service quality and hence client satisfaction, and the third advantage is a better corporate reputation, and higher levels of brand awareness.

None of these hurt recruitment and retention efforts or revenue and profitability. Long time readers will remember the service-profit chain modeled by Sears (US) in a 1998 article published in the Harvard Business Review. The authors described how a 5-point increase in employee attitude made a 1.3 unit increase in customer impression, which in turn led to a 0.5% increase in revenue. Put in another industry’s terms, a representative of Delta Hotels and Resorts commented in the GPTW report: "We can’t expect employees to create a welcoming and engaging environment for guests if they don’t first experience this as part of the workplace culture."

"Change is possible," says Wetherow. "And it’s not as complex or extensive as employers might think. We feel that psychological wellbeing in the workplace contributes to a high trust work environment. And research from our Institute confirms that companies that have a high trust workplace also have financially high performing workplaces."

Company Best Practices

1. HANDING OVER CONTROL

1-800-GOT-JUNK? is a full-service junk removal company with about 100 employees that earned a spot on the Great Place to Work list of Best Workplaces in Canada in 2007 and 2009. Results from the employee survey indicate they feel respected by, and have strong levels of respect for, management.

1-800-GOT-JUNK? has given control of paid time off to employees. The company’s attendance tracker lumps vacation time, sick leave, and family time together. This gives employees more control over their personal paid leave. If someone uses less sick time, they get more vacation days. After the first year of work, all corporate staff get five weeks off. Management also has some discretionary authority to extend the personal paid leave on a case by case basis as needed.

2. GIVING EMPLOYEES A VOICE

Protegra, a business performance and information technology company, continuously works to create a non-critical culture wherein its 64 employees feel comfortable being themselves and expressing their own ideas. In 2009, the company undertook a project to codify its culture. The "Enduring Culture" project became an opportunity for employees to define principles and practices for every role within the company. It’s not a top-down directive of rules and regulations but a collaborative effort to ensure that everyone in aware of the responsibilities, expectations and behaviour required of each individual.

Protegra’s "perpetual culture machine" is a dynamic technology that is easily accessible to its employees, and acts as a central repository for information on company values, principles, and practices.

3. SUPPORTING EMPLOYEES THROUGH FEEDBACK

At McDonald’s Canada, employees receive regular and constructive feedback. By helping provide an environment where employees are consistently coached, developed and encouraged to expand their skills and experience levels, the McDonald’s performance development system links with its people promise, which states "we value you, your growth and your contributions." At the beginning of each year, employees are invited to document the performance goals and development objectives on which they will be evaluated. To make sure the objectives are focused, employees are encouraged to develop SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound).

Source: Great Place to Work Institute Canada and Human Resources and
Social Development Canada, 2009. Mental Health in Canadian Workplaces: Investigating Employer’s Best Practices. Used with permission.

Note: "The Employee-Customer-Profit Chain at Sears", by AJ Rucci,
SP Kirn, and RT Quinn, was published in the January-February 1998
edition of the Harvard Business Review.