Are your psychosocial safety efforts making the intended difference?

Are your psychosocial safety efforts making the intended difference? 

Organisations are investing more significantly than ever in initiatives to protect and promote workplace psychosocial safety. Driven by strengthened WHS legislation and a growing ethical imperative, resources are allocated to risk assessments, training programs, wellbeing benefits, and policy development. This commitment is commendable and necessary. 

However, a critical question remains under-addressed: Are these initiatives working? Beyond fulfilling compliance obligations, how do we objectively measure the ‘impact’ of our efforts and investments? As a psychologist, I’ve observed many organisations struggle to move beyond surface-level activity tracking and assess whether their psychosocial safety strategies make a tangible difference to employee wellbeing and risk mitigation. 

Without robust measurement, we risk investing in well-intentioned but ineffective programs, miss opportunities for continuous improvement, and struggle to demonstrate the value of these efforts.  

Why measure?  

Measuring the effectiveness of psychosocial safety initiatives isn’t just a ‘nice-to-have’ or an academic exercise. It’s a strategic imperative that delivers multiple benefits: 

• Demonstrates due diligence and continuous improvement: robust measurement provides evidence that the organisation is not just implementing controls but actively monitoring their effectiveness, a key aspect of WHS due diligence and a foundation for continuous improvement. 

• Optimises resource allocation: understanding which initiatives yield the best results helps justify current investments and guides future resource allocation towards the most impactful strategies. 

• Fosters accountability: clear metrics hold leaders and the organisation accountable for achieving psychosocial safety outcomes, moving it from a purely HR/P&C/WHS function to a shared leadership responsibility. 

• Enables learning and refinement: data-driven insights allow organisations to learn what works (and what doesn’t) within their specific context, enabling the refinement and enhancement of strategies over time. 

• Strengthens the business case: connecting psychosocial safety improvements to tangible business outcomes (e.g., improved engagement, reduced turnover, increased productivity) reinforces its strategic importance to the executive team and board. 

Moving beyond lag indicators (though they still matter) 

Traditionally, many organisations have relied heavily on lag indicators to assess workplace health and safety. These include: 

• Workers’ compensation claims for psychological injury 

• Psychosocial hazard incident reports 

• Employee Assistance Program (EAP) utilisation rates (for problem areas) 

• Absenteeism and sick leave rates (particularly stress-related) 

• Employee turnover and regrettable loss rates 

These metrics are important because they reflect past outcomes and can signal significant issues. However, they have limitations: 

• Retrospective: they tell you about harm that has already occurred. 

• Underreporting: psychological injuries or concerns are often underreported due to stigma or fear. 

• Multi-factorial: many lag indicators can be influenced by a wide range of factors, making it hard to isolate the impact of specific psychosocial initiatives. 

While lag indicators form part of the picture, a truly effective measurement strategy must also embrace proactive measures. 

The power of lead indicators: early warnings and proactive insight 

Lead indicators signal potential future performance and indicate whether risk controls and supportive initiatives operate effectively before harm occurs. They provide early warnings and proactive insights, allowing for timely adjustments. 

Here are key lead indicators relevant to psychosocial safety:

1. Sentiment data (primarily from employee listening):

Psychosocial risk factor scores: track scores on specific items within engagement, pulse, or dedicated psychosocial safety surveys. These should align with known risk factors (e.g., “My workload is manageable,” “I have control over how I do my work,” “My manager supports my wellbeing,” “I feel respected by my colleagues,” “I feel safe to speak up”). 

Qualitative feedback themes: systematically analyse comments from surveys and other feedback channels (e.g., exit interviews, focus groups) for themes related to workload, support, leadership, change management, and respect. 

Perceived effectiveness of initiatives: ask employees about the perceived value and accessibility of specific wellbeing programs, support resources, or consultation mechanisms. 

Psychological safety metrics: use validated scales or specific questions to measure the extent to which employees feel safe taking interpersonal risks (e.g., voicing opinions, and admitting mistakes). 

2. Behavioural and observational data:

Leadership behaviours: gather data on leadership behaviours that support psychosocial safety (e.g., frequency and quality of supportive check-ins, as reported by direct reports; demonstration of inclusive leadership). This can be sourced via 360-degree feedback (if implemented carefully) or upward feedback mechanisms. 

Training effectiveness and uptake: track participation rates in psychosocial safety training for managers and employees. More importantly, assess knowledge retention and, ideally, observed behaviour change post-training. 

Reporting culture: monitor the rate of employees raising concerns through preferred channels (e.g., HR/P&C, WHS representatives, ethics hotlines). An increase in reporting in a supportive culture can be a positive sign that people feel safer speaking up. 

Use of flexible work arrangements: track uptake and employee satisfaction with flexible work options, which can be a control for managing work-life responsibilities.

3. Process and system effectiveness indicators:

Risk management process metrics: track the completion rates and timeliness of psychosocial risk assessments, action plan development, and closure of identified actions. 

Awareness and accessibility: measure the percentage of employees aware of psychosocial safety policies, reporting mechanisms, and available support resources (e.g., EAP, mental health first aiders). 

Consultation effectiveness: track employee consultation’s regularity and perceived effectiveness on WHS matters, including psychosocial hazards. 

Early intervention and return-to-work: monitor the effectiveness of early intervention programs for employees experiencing psychological distress and the success rates of return-to-work programs for psychological injuries. 

Integrating quantitative and qualitative data for the full story 

A robust measurement strategy relies on both numbers and narratives. 

Quantitative data (e.g., survey scores, participation rates) provides scale, allows for trend analysis, and helps identify statistical patterns or hotspots. 

Qualitative data (e.g., comments, focus group insights, interview themes) provides context, depth, and the crucial “why” behind the numbers. It uncovers your employees’ lived experiences. 

For example, a declining survey score on “manager support” (quantitative) becomes far more actionable when combined with qualitative comments detailing specific unsupportive behaviours or team needs. 

Establishing baselines and setting realistic targets 

To understand the impact, you need a starting point. 

Baseline measurement: before launching significant new psychosocial safety initiatives, conduct baseline measurements for your chosen lead and lag indicators. 

SMART Targets: set Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART) targets for improvement. Recognise that cultural change and shifts in deep-seated risk factors take time; don’t expect overnight transformations. Focus on incremental progress. 

Reporting and communicating impact effectively 

Data is only valuable if it’s understood and acted upon. 

Tailor reports: customise reports for different audiences (Board, Executive Leadership Team, managers, employees), focusing on the metrics and insights most relevant to them. 

Visualise data: use dashboards and clear visualisations to make complex data accessible and engaging. 

Focus on insights, not data dumps: go beyond presenting numbers; explain what they mean, identify key trends, and recommend actionable steps. 

Communicate transparently: share progress (and acknowledge challenges) with employees. This builds trust, demonstrates commitment, and helps maintain momentum for ongoing initiatives. 

The leadership role in driving a measurement culture 

Effective measurement of psychosocial safety doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It requires: 

• Executive sponsorship: Senior leaders must champion the importance of meaningful measurement and demand data-driven insights rather than just activity reports. 

• Resource commitment: organisations need to invest in the systems, tools, and skills (e.g., people analytics capability) required for robust data collection and analysis. 

• Data-informed decision-making: leaders must demonstrate that they are using these metrics to inform strategic decisions, refine programs, and drive continuous improvement in psychosocial safety. 

From Good Intentions to Demonstrable Impact 

Measuring the impact of your psychosocial safety initiatives is no longer optional; it’s a core component of responsible governance and strategic people management. It requires a shift from merely tracking activities to assessing genuine outcomes, embracing a holistic approach that blends lead and lag indicators, quantitative precision with qualitative depth. 

By investing in a robust measurement framework, organisations can move beyond good intentions, gain true insight into the effectiveness of their efforts, and make more informed decisions to create genuinely healthier, safer, and higher-performing workplaces.