Considerations for an organizational psychological health and safety scorecard

0
Considerations for an organizational psychological health and safety scorecard
Considerations for an organizational psychological health and safety scorecard

Credit: Getty Images/Wasan Tita.

Adherence to a Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) framework is at the core of psychological safety success. One challenge I continue to observe with many organizations dipping their toes into psychological health and safety scorecards is lack of awareness about the gap between activities and evidence-based outcomes. In other words, sending employees to training does not mean anything changes.

Improving psychological health and safety’s (PHS) impact requires understanding that its role is mitigating mental harm and promoting mental health. Since the environment can play a dramatic role in eliminating or mitigating harm, employers have a direct role in reducing unpleasant emotions like fear and protecting employees from harassment, bullying and workplace violence.

It’s encouraging to see Safe Work Australia updating its legislation to make employees accountable for immediate notification of any worker engaged in death by suicide or suicide attempts at work or home that could be linked to the workplace. During my 30-plus years of clinical work, I have witnessed a direct link between employees’ workplace experiences and death by suicide numerous times.

The case of the France telecom CEO who was jailed over a restructuring policy linked to employee suicide is a reminder to all CEOs that stressing employees beyond their ability to cope can result in significant mental harm, injury, illness and death. Even with all the conversations about mental health today, too many CEOs do not fully understand that how work is organized and facilitated can positively or negatively impact employee well-being.

Most CEOs know why earplugs are needed, but not why it is essential that employees do not live in constant fear. From its legislative updates, it’s clear Australia understands that education, encouragement and enforcement are required to help CEOs “get it.”

This is where a PHS scorecard can help: it aims to measure if the things being done to protect employees’ emotional well-being are working.

Considerations for designing a PHS scorecard

Let’s look at the example of Company X, which has experienced some significant organizational changes. Work demand is increasingly perceived as a drain by a substantial percentage of the workforce (e.g., they chronically feel the employer’s expectations are unrealistic), which has converted this psychosocial factor to a psychosocial hazard.

When a work demand’s frequency, duration and intensity increase, employees feel expectations placed on them are excessive, and they have no clarity on when things will improve, it increases their risk of mental harm, injury and illness.

As part of Company X’s new journey, it conducts an evidence-based PHS workplace assessment and uncovers insights such as work demand concerns. This is the Plan stage, during which the company collects data through surveys and focus groups to understand the employee experience and determine its strengths and opportunities.

The planning stage explores how to remove or control hazards and determine what protective factors might mitigate risk. In this example, the action plan determines that the hazard of excessive work demand will be a priority.

I coach employers that less is more. It is prudent to do a few things focused on prevention to ensure there is capacity and energy to follow up.

The planning phase typically provides recommendations like redesigning work, tweaking or updating policies and procedures, and leveraging new technologies such as AI to ease the workload. It may also include implementing programs like psychologically safe leadership and mental fitness training to facilitate work and help employees thrive.

The Do stage involves communicating and implementing the plan. Where things often slip is the lack of a Check to measure if the company’s approach is working. The Check phase aims to ensure new behaviours and habits required to change the employee experience are being adopted and are on track.

By doing regular checks, employers can move to the Act stage, which leverages a continuous improvement lens to improve or change action steps to increase impact. An employers’ proposed action plans are typically OK. However, lack of impact often comes down to a lack of focus in the Check and Act stages. This tendency was noted in a recent CSA research study as an opportunity for improvement.

The roles of measurement and reporting

Imagine that in the above example, Company X found hazards that leaders are concerned about. The leaders see a clear link between these hazards and key performance indicators (KPIs) such as disability claims, attendance, turnover, accidents, and workplace conflict and violence incidents. In addition, a link has been made to explain how the above KPIs can negatively impact an employer’s financials, sales targets, customer service, productivity goals and success metrics.

A well-designed PHS scorecard begins with clarity and intention that can answer the Why, What and How for each desired action plan outcome. It does not need to be complicated. It must be logical and put into simple terms that can be explained to a CEO in less than 60 seconds so they understand the benefits and why the investment of resources is required (i.e., business case).

The most critical focus of any CEO is their organization’s short- and long-term sustainability, defined by the health of the organization’s products/services quality, process efficiency and people capacity, safety and health. These same three imperatives are core factors in predicting success in achieving the desired financial and service delivery goals in any organization.

Every KPI should clearly indicate what must happen to achieve the desired outcome — the targeted key performance behaviours (KPBs) to predict opportunity for success. This takes more thought and effort but pays off. Rather than just listing the activities in the plan (i.e., leadership training), be clear on a few desired KPBs that will be measured.

The defined KPBs are the PHS lead indicators of change. In occupational health and safety at a power company, an example of a KPB may be that “alert checks” are done on a teammate before they climb a hydro pole. A partner goes through a checklist to ensure the climber is tuned into what is up the pole, is mentally focused, and has the correct equipment. This KPB goal is to reduce risks such as a tragic death by electrocution.

In most organizations, workplace mental health plans only list activities, with little foresight into monitoring KPBs or evaluating and measuring impact, such as the value of and return on investment.

When highlighted and practiced, KPBs drive and support the PDCA framework and steps because they require constant monitoring and measuring to evaluate if the behaviours and habits are in place. OHS understands that KPBs are non-negotiable. There is work to do in the emerging space of PHS to move this conversation from activity to habits, thoughtful measurement, and program evaluation that drive a constant accountability feedback loop.

A well-designed PHS scorecard can help employers understand if their time, effort and investment are impacting the employee experience.

Start with a simple scorecard that measures a few items, matures the PHS program and improves one KPB, one KPI and one outcome at a time. Ultimately, there is a balance between working in and on an organization, and those facilitating PHS must learn how to find opportunities to make an impact.

Dr. Bill Howatt is the Ottawa-based president of Howatt HR Consulting.


Print this page


link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *