What does employee wellbeing actually mean?
BSC 'Future of Workplace Wellbeing' roundtable. Panel left to right: Jigna Patel (Chair), Rebecca Canham, Rob Bullen, Jo Southan, Clare Walsby
What does it mean to be well at work? Should there be a universally accepted definition of employee wellbeing? And how do we measure it?
In today’s workplace – shaped by the aftermath of the pandemic, the rise of AI, and shifting employee expectations – wellbeing is no longer a soft concern. People aren’t just moving jobs for better salaries, but for better management, more flexibility, and workplaces that support their mental and physical health. As organisations adapt, the challenge is no longer whether to prioritise wellbeing – but how.
At a recent roundtable event chaired by the British Safety Council in London, these questions came to the fore as attendees from across sectors gathered to explore the evolving concept of wellbeing in the workplace.
The roundtable followed a joint research project between the British Safety Council and the Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM), which sought to better understand whether and how employers support employee wellbeing in practice.
Defining wellbeing: a moving target
The event opened with a discussion around the difficulty of defining workplace wellbeing. Chairing the session, Jigna Patel, Director of Audit and Consultancy at British Safety Council invited Rebecca Canham, Principal Scientist at the IOM, to present the findings from the joint research project.
Canham told attendees that nearly three-quarters of the academic literature reviewed lacked a consistent definition of work-related wellbeing. In the absence of a universal or legal definition, many employers are left uncertain about which measures to implement, while employees are similarly unclear on what they should expect. This ambiguity was reflected in the research interviews, where employees often struggled to articulate what wellbeing meant within the context of their own organisations.
The challenge, Canham explained, is that wellbeing is fluid by nature – shaped by time, circumstance, and individual experience. What constitutes wellbeing can shift from hour to hour, day to day, and across different stages of an employee’s life or career. “As soon as we specify a definition, there will potentially be individuals who don’t consider themselves to fall within that bracket,” she warned.
Rather than boxing people in, Canham stressed that any framework needs to strike a balance between providing a stable construct for measuring change over time while remaining broad enough to reflect diverse experiences. This tension, she suggested, may be one reason the concept remains so inconsistently defined across both research and industry.
One size doesn’t fit all
Expanding on this theme, Rob Bullen, Senior Solutions Consultant at software company HandsHQ, noted that every organisation operates differently and has its own culture. While supporting a universal definition, Bullen highlighted it would need to be a baseline rather than restrictive.
This point was echoed by Jo Southan, Public Health Service Manager at Warwickshire County Council. Southan noted that a clear definition could be particularly useful for young people entering the workforce but stressed it must remain adaptable so that businesses can make it meaningful for their own teams.
Clare Walsby, Senior Operations Manager at the McPin Foundation, agreed, noting that a baseline definition – whether formalised in policy or law – could offer essential guidance to organisations unsure where to begin.
What, then, should that baseline look like? It’s a question that British Safety Council will continue to explore, with this roundtable being just the first in a series of events and research efforts. Nevertheless, Rob Bullen pointed to Abraham Maslow’s ‘hierarchy of needs’ as “a good starting base”. Though hesitant to lean too heavily on theory, the model – which spans basic physical needs to psychological safety and self-fulfilment – offers a helpful lens. Applied to the workplace, it suggests that wellbeing must begin with fundamentals like safety and financial stability, before extending to connection, purpose and growth.
Measuring wellbeing
Rather than pursuing a one-size-fits-all definition, the panel proposed a more practical, organisation-specific approach to wellbeing. Rebecca Canham suggested that organisations could benefit from a flexible framework made up of different components, each of which may hold more or less relevance depending on the workforce, working environment, and wider societal pressures – from an ageing population and digital transformation to climate anxiety.
Building on this, Rob Bullen championed the idea of a wellbeing register, encouraging employers to “look inwards” and assess which wellbeing factors are most affecting their organisation. This could involve profiling internal risks, listening to employees, and forming partnerships with external groups such as charities to shape an appropriate response.
However, progress towards implementing a wellbeing or risk register has been hindered by a common concern among employers: the fear of accountability.
“As soon as you collect a body of data,” said Canham, “it can and will be used against you.” This apprehension often stops organisations from taking even the first step towards assessment. Overcoming that fear, she argued, is essential: “push companies to take that initial step” so they can act proactively to support their employees.
Whose responsibility is wellbeing?
Wellbeing at work is not solely the responsibility of the employer. While organisations can and should support staff to care for themselves outside work, Clare Walsby reminded attendees that it is “not the employer’s responsibility to support and manage everything within their lives.”
Establishing these boundaries and expectations around employer and employee responsibilities can only be done through honest, open dialogue. Employers have a clear obligation to proactively assess the wellbeing of their workforce – but doing so effectively depends on creating a culture in which employees also feel empowered to speak up. Too often, a lack of clarity about how and where to raise concerns (whether with a line manager, HR, or elsewhere) prevents action until issues escalate.
Jo Southan highlighted the construction industry as a case in point, noting the sector’s particularly high suicide rate. Even small interventions, she suggested, can make a difference. Allowing workers to be based closer to their families, for example, can help prevent family breakdown and improve wellbeing both inside and outside the workplace by enabling more quality time at home.
To facilitate those kinds of conversations, managers must be selected and supported not just for their technical competence, but for their people skills. While measures such as mental health first aiders remain important, they are often only activated once an employee has already reached crisis point. The goal should be to build confidence on both sides to engage in regular conversations throughout an employee’s time with the organisation.
“It’s not just about picking someone up once they’ve fallen over,” said Canham, “but stopping them from falling over in the first place.”
What does it mean to be well at work?
The clear takeaway from the roundtable was that meaningful conversations – supported by structured processes, such as a wellbeing risk register – are essential to real progress on workplace wellbeing.
As Rob Bullen noted, quoting management thinker Peter Drucker, “you can’t manage what you can’t measure.”
While the roundtable may not have offered a definitive answer to what it means to be well at work, it made clear that the conversation is both necessary and ongoing. Defining wellbeing is complex, but that complexity should not be a barrier to action. From developing internal risk registers to empowering managers with the right skills, there are meaningful steps organisations can take – even without a universal definition in place.
What emerged from the discussion was a shared recognition that wellbeing is not a fixed state, nor a tick-box exercise. It’s a dynamic, evolving relationship between employer and employee – built on open communication, mutual responsibility, and the willingness to listen and track progress.
As British Safety Council continues this programme of research and engagement, the challenge ahead lies in turning broad agreement into consistent practice. Because, ultimately, being well at work isn’t about having all the answers – it’s about asking the right questions, early and often.
