bs_bs_banner
International Journal of Mental Health Nursing (2014) 23, 381–382
doi: 10.1111/inm.12103
Editorial
Workplace well-being: Healing wounds or applying Band-Aids? The emerging emphasis on mental health and well-being in many aspects of our lives, including the workplace, is certainly encouraging. The impact of stressors in working environments as a result of bullying, heavy workloads, bureaucratic burden, micromanagement, and lack of effective, two-way communication has been identified as a major contributor to significant mental distress and its negative consequences. Indeed, earlier this year, SANE Australia acknowledged the influence of the workplace on mental health, alerting us to the fact that approximately 20% of suicides among people of working age are work related. In reality, we all know this figure is likely much higher, and when we consider how many more people will attempt suicide or have suicidal thoughts related to their work environment, the issue is alarming. Employers, therefore, have not only a golden opportunity, but a moral obligation to address issues related to the mental health and well-being of employees. I have long been critical of the apparent overemphasis on physical health and safety in comparison to the underrepresentation of mental health initiatives. For decades, the message has been out there about the importance of physical fitness, ‘30 minutes a day’ and ‘10 000 steps’, and healthy eating, ‘2 and 5’; catchy slogans supported by expensive advertising campaigns. Whether we choose to listen or not, the lessons are clear: we need to look after our bodies to achieve good health. Many programmes have made it into the workplace, ‘10 000 steps’ challenges are popular, using the spirit of competition to get people moving, literally! Healthy options are provided as an alternative to fast foods, and of course, occupational health and safety takes an active role in reducing risks and promoting safe working environments. Some organizations provide free flu vaccinations. Whatever the action, the message is clear: we want you to be safe and well, and we’re prepared to put our money where our mouth is. All of this is fantastic; it is encouraging to see such an active investment in the health of the organization’s greatest assets: its people. Unfortunately, interventions related to mental health are generally, sadly, lacking in compari© 2014 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
son. Particularly fascinating for me is the view that education and training is the best approach to mental health promotion. So let’s take up ‘10 000 steps’ to improve our physical fitness, engage in a challenge, have some fun, and hopefully develop sustainable behavioural change. For mental health, let’s bring in the mental health first aid trainers, learn how to be more aware and understanding, and hope that makes some difference into the future. No problem with training, but it’s hardly the same thing. If we promote physical health through organized activities, often designed to be fun, then shouldn’t we do the same with mental health? The message seems to be slowly seeping through, with some organizations providing a focus on well-being, encouraging staff to identify their own symptoms of stress, take a break, or go for a walk. In some instances, the approach is more organized, with encouraging messages, relaxation exercises, and other feel-good activities being placed on walls and noticeboards, sent via email or posted to a dedicated website. Information about seeking help for more serious problems, including details of employee assistance, are often also included. Is it about time? Yes, absolutely. No argument here. At the same time, I feel a nagging sense of discomfort that this is more about applying Band-Aids than healing wounds. One question persists: Do these activities reflect a genuine desire to promote the mental health and wellbeing of staff, to create an open and nurturing environment? Or are they cosmetic, tokenistic changes to give the impression that something is being done without real commitment for genuine and ongoing improvement to the working environment? Or, at best, do they reflect the belief that activities to promote well-being can counteract inadequate support in other respects throughout the organization? At worst, these interventions are introduced where top-down and horizontal violence is evident and subtly condoned. A step in the right direction suddenly becomes a parody. Worse still, the very idea of mental health promotion is tarnished, a management ploy to be seen to be doing the right thing, putting on Band-Aids while the wounds continue to deteriorate. Furthermore,
382
well-being is often presented as an individual responsibility. Recently, I saw an email encouraging staff to attend a programme on developing resilience through periods of change. Sounds useful, but where is the expectation that senior managers attend programmes to manage the change, to involve staff at all levels in creating the change, and actively communicate the change and its implications across the organization? This is a very complex issue. Whether we work for health services, universities, or the non-government sector, we are working for organizations under pressure. Continual funding cuts, restrictions, and increased accountability to multiple stakeholders intensifies the burden on all staff, but particularly on management to do more with less. Two-way communication and a supportive environment can be among the early casualties of organizational turmoil. While other priorities emerge, mental health and well-being must remain central considerations. Within this context, there is certainly a place for structured programmes to promote mental health and well-being. At the same time, these must be a part of a whole-of-organization approach to promoting a safe and healthy workplace, where staff are valued and respected, and activities promoting mental well-being reflect a positive environment, rather than being in place of it.
EDITORIAL
So how do we assure this? A question too complex for an easy answer. Perhaps we need some criteria for organizational readiness (similar to that developed in the ‘elimination of seclusion’ projects), with a certain score needed to commence the process. Of course, this would be at the discretion of the organizations themselves, but might well increase the confidence of staff that initiatives are well intended and likely to be consistently supported in the long term. These participating organizations could be recognized by a relevant mental health-focused organization as beacon sites for others to emulate. This might not only help us avoid tokenism, it could potentially serve as effective advertising for genuine mental health promotion. Just a thought. I’m sure greater minds than mine will have better ones. Let’s encourage our workplace to take serious note of mental health and well-being, and to actively promote it throughout. Most importantly, let’s make sure they do it right and substitute the supply of Band-Aids with what is needed to heal the wounds and avoid new ones forming. Brenda Happell Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
International Journal of Mental Health Nursing (2014) 23, 381–382
doi: 10.1111/inm.12103
Editorial
Workplace well-being: Healing wounds or applying Band-Aids? The emerging emphasis on mental health and well-being in many aspects of our lives, including the workplace, is certainly encouraging. The impact of stressors in working environments as a result of bullying, heavy workloads, bureaucratic burden, micromanagement, and lack of effective, two-way communication has been identified as a major contributor to significant mental distress and its negative consequences. Indeed, earlier this year, SANE Australia acknowledged the influence of the workplace on mental health, alerting us to the fact that approximately 20% of suicides among people of working age are work related. In reality, we all know this figure is likely much higher, and when we consider how many more people will attempt suicide or have suicidal thoughts related to their work environment, the issue is alarming. Employers, therefore, have not only a golden opportunity, but a moral obligation to address issues related to the mental health and well-being of employees. I have long been critical of the apparent overemphasis on physical health and safety in comparison to the underrepresentation of mental health initiatives. For decades, the message has been out there about the importance of physical fitness, ‘30 minutes a day’ and ‘10 000 steps’, and healthy eating, ‘2 and 5’; catchy slogans supported by expensive advertising campaigns. Whether we choose to listen or not, the lessons are clear: we need to look after our bodies to achieve good health. Many programmes have made it into the workplace, ‘10 000 steps’ challenges are popular, using the spirit of competition to get people moving, literally! Healthy options are provided as an alternative to fast foods, and of course, occupational health and safety takes an active role in reducing risks and promoting safe working environments. Some organizations provide free flu vaccinations. Whatever the action, the message is clear: we want you to be safe and well, and we’re prepared to put our money where our mouth is. All of this is fantastic; it is encouraging to see such an active investment in the health of the organization’s greatest assets: its people. Unfortunately, interventions related to mental health are generally, sadly, lacking in compari© 2014 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
son. Particularly fascinating for me is the view that education and training is the best approach to mental health promotion. So let’s take up ‘10 000 steps’ to improve our physical fitness, engage in a challenge, have some fun, and hopefully develop sustainable behavioural change. For mental health, let’s bring in the mental health first aid trainers, learn how to be more aware and understanding, and hope that makes some difference into the future. No problem with training, but it’s hardly the same thing. If we promote physical health through organized activities, often designed to be fun, then shouldn’t we do the same with mental health? The message seems to be slowly seeping through, with some organizations providing a focus on well-being, encouraging staff to identify their own symptoms of stress, take a break, or go for a walk. In some instances, the approach is more organized, with encouraging messages, relaxation exercises, and other feel-good activities being placed on walls and noticeboards, sent via email or posted to a dedicated website. Information about seeking help for more serious problems, including details of employee assistance, are often also included. Is it about time? Yes, absolutely. No argument here. At the same time, I feel a nagging sense of discomfort that this is more about applying Band-Aids than healing wounds. One question persists: Do these activities reflect a genuine desire to promote the mental health and wellbeing of staff, to create an open and nurturing environment? Or are they cosmetic, tokenistic changes to give the impression that something is being done without real commitment for genuine and ongoing improvement to the working environment? Or, at best, do they reflect the belief that activities to promote well-being can counteract inadequate support in other respects throughout the organization? At worst, these interventions are introduced where top-down and horizontal violence is evident and subtly condoned. A step in the right direction suddenly becomes a parody. Worse still, the very idea of mental health promotion is tarnished, a management ploy to be seen to be doing the right thing, putting on Band-Aids while the wounds continue to deteriorate. Furthermore,
382
well-being is often presented as an individual responsibility. Recently, I saw an email encouraging staff to attend a programme on developing resilience through periods of change. Sounds useful, but where is the expectation that senior managers attend programmes to manage the change, to involve staff at all levels in creating the change, and actively communicate the change and its implications across the organization? This is a very complex issue. Whether we work for health services, universities, or the non-government sector, we are working for organizations under pressure. Continual funding cuts, restrictions, and increased accountability to multiple stakeholders intensifies the burden on all staff, but particularly on management to do more with less. Two-way communication and a supportive environment can be among the early casualties of organizational turmoil. While other priorities emerge, mental health and well-being must remain central considerations. Within this context, there is certainly a place for structured programmes to promote mental health and well-being. At the same time, these must be a part of a whole-of-organization approach to promoting a safe and healthy workplace, where staff are valued and respected, and activities promoting mental well-being reflect a positive environment, rather than being in place of it.
EDITORIAL
So how do we assure this? A question too complex for an easy answer. Perhaps we need some criteria for organizational readiness (similar to that developed in the ‘elimination of seclusion’ projects), with a certain score needed to commence the process. Of course, this would be at the discretion of the organizations themselves, but might well increase the confidence of staff that initiatives are well intended and likely to be consistently supported in the long term. These participating organizations could be recognized by a relevant mental health-focused organization as beacon sites for others to emulate. This might not only help us avoid tokenism, it could potentially serve as effective advertising for genuine mental health promotion. Just a thought. I’m sure greater minds than mine will have better ones. Let’s encourage our workplace to take serious note of mental health and well-being, and to actively promote it throughout. Most importantly, let’s make sure they do it right and substitute the supply of Band-Aids with what is needed to heal the wounds and avoid new ones forming. Brenda Happell Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.
