FLASH Research: Portrait of the Implementation of Occupational Health and Wellness Management Practices

Portrait of the Implementation of Occupational Health and Wellness Management Practices

 

From October 2019 to January 2020, OSMET surveyed a sample of Canadian companies that agreed to complete an online questionnaire related to workplace health and wellness. Among other things, OSMET assessed the level of development of 67 workplace health and wellness management practices. Each practice was classified according to a typology developed in the SALVEO study1 and recently used by OSMET to analyze its contribution to workplace absenteeism2.
This typology encompasses four dimensions related to the conditions of work organization associated with the development of health and wellness problems at work: task design, work demands, social relations and rewards. The practices are then classified according to the macro, meso and micro levels of an enterprise. The macro level refers to practices aimed at regulating health and wellness risks (e.g., stress surveys) and communication strategies (e.g., monthly health bulletins). The meso level refers to practices aimed at the conditions of the organization of work present in a company (e.g., control of the workload). At the micro level, the practices target the individual (e.g., relaxation workshop).
This Research FLASH looks at the implementation of these practices in 159 companies that provided information on the level of implementation according to three response choices: Not at all, weakly, strongly. In this sample, 18.1% are small businesses (fewer than 50 employees), 51.6% are medium businesses (50-499 employees), and 30.3% are large businesses (500 or more employees). A proportion of 51.0% of the firms operate in the service sector.

Results

Table I present the distribution of macro-level workplace health and wellness management practices.

On average, 32% of the companies have strongly implemented practices related to communication strategies and 16% practices related to risk regulation. The most strongly implemented practices (50% and more of the companies) are the communication mechanisms and the practices of correction of the risks of the work environment.

Table II presents the distribution of meso-level workplace health and wellness management practices.

On average, between 29% and 56% of companies invest heavily in meso-level practices associated with one or other of the four dimensions of work organization conditions related to the development of occupational health and wellness problems. The practices most strongly implemented (50% and more of the companies) are: increasing autonomy in work, direct employee participation, job analysis and description, teamwork, a psychological harassment policy, performance evaluation practices, leave banks and the possibility of promotion to a higher level.

Table III presents the distribution of micro-level workplace health and wellness management practices.

 

On average, between 9%-22% of companies invest heavily in micro-level practices. The presence of an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) appears to be the practice most strongly implemented by the majority of companies surveyed.

Figure 1 compares the level of development of the macro, meso and micro levels and their dimensions. For each dimension of practices, we calculated the average of the items in each dimension and then scaled them to 0-100. Scores 0-33 can be classified as low, 34-66 as medium, and 67-100 as high.

Figure 1. Level of implementation of management practice dimensions

 

Overall, the meso level is more strongly implemented than the other levels of practices, but none of the practice dimensions reach the high level. Only communication strategies are moderately implemented for the macro level, while the microlevel practices are all at low levels.

More recently, analyses have been conducted to examine the role of firm size as well as the sector of economic activity. The following table presents the results of these analyses.

 

Macro and micro-level practices are more strongly implemented when the size of the company is high. However, the size of the company is not associated with a stronger implementation of meso-level practices. Finally, the economic sector has a weak influence on the level of implementation, as only the practices related to physical activity and stress management are more strongly implemented.

Conclusion

Although the sample analyzed does not allow us to generalize the results, the portrait of the implementation of health and wellness management practices allows us to draw the following conclusions:

  • Overall, companies are investing more in practices targeting work organization conditions (meso level) but the level of implementation remains average. These investments do not depend on the size or economic sector of the company.
  • At the macro level, communication strategies are moderately implemented, while practices aimed at risk regulation are much less so. However, the level of implementation depends on the size of the company
  • Practices aimed at the individual (micro level) are weakly implemented but tend to be more widely found in larger companies and in some respects (physical activity and stress management) in companies in the service sector.

These results paint a picture of the situation prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and suggest that the implementation of health and wellness management practices can be greatly improved. Of course, with the constraints of the health measures, practices such as telecommuting and flexible work schedules will have increased dramatically to become the norm in many workplaces. With the return to the workplace looming and the impact of the pandemic on employee health and wellness, particularly mental health, it is clear that investments are needed to enhance the impact that the organization can have in promoting better health and wellness. Without these investments in prevention, problems related to absenteeism and productivity are likely to be exacerbated, inevitably resulting in significant costs to businesses, individuals and the community. In this regard, OSMET's work suggests that implementing management practices related to communication strategies, job design, social relations and work-family balance could lead to lower absenteeism.2

References

  1. Marchand, A., Haines, V. Y., Harvey, S., Dextras‐Gauthier, J., and Durand, P. (2016) Health and Stress Management and Mental‐health Disability Claims. Stress & Health, 32: 569–577. doi: 1002/smi.2663.
  2. Observatoire sur la santé et le mieux-être au travail (octobre 2020). L’absentéisme et les pratiques de gestion en santé et mieux-être au travail. Collection FLASH Recherche, Université de Montréal.

Web site: www.osmet.umontreal.ca

About OSMET

The Observatoire sur la santé et le mieux-être au travail (OSMET) was born of a collaboration between the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the Institut de recherche en santé publique (now the Centre de recherche en santé publique) and the School of Industrial Relations of the Université de Montréal. OSMET is financially supported by four founding partners: LifeWorks Wellness Solutions (formerly Morneau Shepell), McKesson Canada, Medavie Blue Cross and Pratt & Whitney Canada.

 

This content has been updated on 12 July 2023 at 1h28.