Leading wellbeing specialists and employer representatives have urged the government to strengthen national support for workplace wellbeing, warning that UK productivity will continue to fall behind without structural change.
The call follows a roundtable meeting chaired by psychologist Gethin Nadin and led by Professor Sir Cary Cooper CBE, in which participants examined how recommendations from the Mayfield Review could be put into practice.
The discussion, convened by the Policy Liaison Group on Workplace Wellbeing, brought together senior policymakers, employer representatives and HR leaders to assess how the UK can build healthier and more productive working lives.
Contributors agreed that the country needs stronger systems to measure wellbeing, shape workplace culture and raise performance at scale. They also warned that rising costs, growing pressures on employers and a 5 percent unemployment rate risk diverting attention away from employee health at a critical moment.
Professor Sir Cary Cooper’s Mental Capital and Wellbeing Review, published in 2008, set out many of the principles echoed in Sir Charlie Mayfield’s recent findings related to the Keep Britain Working Review. Participants said the new momentum created by that work must now be used to modernise support for employees and to help employers embed wellbeing as a core part of business planning.
Infrastructure Seen as Missing Link
Participants said UK employers need clear frameworks to measure wellbeing accurately and to track improvements over time. The group noted the lack of consistent infrastructure across organisations, particularly around survey practice, data collection and reporting processes. Contributors also raised concern that tools are failing to reach small and medium sized enterprises, even though SMEs employ most of the UK workforce.
Several participants said that while there is strong support for the direction of the Mayfield Review, organisations cannot act effectively without reliable measurement systems, baseline benchmarks and cultural indicators. They agreed that the ability to track progress should be built into business planning rather than left to individual departments.
Attendees also pointed to the risk that wellbeing becomes siloed inside HR teams. Many argued that responsibility must instead sit across leadership, line management and organisational design, with managers selected and equipped for emotional intelligence as well as technical competence.
Wellbeing and National Output Linked
Professor Sir Cary Cooper spoke about the connection between national productivity and employee health. “If we build the systems that allow organisations to measure, track and improve wellbeing, we will have healthier people, stronger workplaces and much better productivity across the economy,” he said. “
We’ve been at the bottom of the league table on productivity per capita for so long. Understandably, we’re preoccupied with breaking out of this stagnation, but we have really good businesses that want to protect the health and wellbeing and the productivity of our country. We need to harness that commitment and ambition.”
Nadin said responsibility must be shared between employers and government. “We must be honest about the direction of travel. Public health is a core function of the state, not a corporate add-on. Expecting employers to shoulder growing elements of the welfare state, without substantial structural support, clear frameworks, or meaningful financial incentives, is not sustainable.”
He said national policy should help employers uphold wellbeing commitments. He added that “[t]he government wants long-term economic improvement, and healthier workplaces are essential to achieving this. But if we want a healthier, more resilient workforce, we need a partnership between government and employers where responsibility is matched with resources.”
Tax Barriers and Financial Pressures Raised
Concerns were raised about how tax treatment of benefits is shaping employee behaviour. Katie Duxbury, head of pay and benefits services at healthcare insurer Bupa, shared insight on support schemes.
“Colleagues are thinking twice, and in some cases opting out of vital healthcare schemes to avoid the taxable benefit, reducing take-home pay. These solutions are essential in keeping people working, not a luxury or perk,” she said.
Participants also pointed to gaps in the Mayfield Review itself. Clemens Moehring, chief operating officer at financial health platform Hastee, questioned whether financial pressures receive sufficient attention in the report.
“The Review is very strong in terms of wellbeing, prevention, early intervention, but I’m very conscious that one of the biggest drivers of employee stress and absences is financial pressure, and that barely appears in the report.”
SMEs Face Distinct Challenges
Several contributors said government action must better reflect the needs of small employers. Maria Paviour, sponsor of the Policy Liaison Group on Workplace Wellbeing, said that “[h]uman capital intelligence and consistent measurement are central to the culture change that organisations need”.
Sandra Dyball, independent health, wellbeing, employee relations and benefits strategist, stressed the vulnerability of smaller teams. “For SMEs,” she said, “there needs to be guidance on how to support people and businesses. If one person is absent, that could be 25% of the total workforce.”
Contributors concluded that the current policy environment does not equip employers to build the culture, systems and leadership capability needed to improve wellbeing in a measurable and sustainable way. They said national support will be vital to help employers reverse long term stagnation and raise productivity across the economy.