5OS07 Wellbeing at Work introduces workplace well-being and explains why it matters. It explores the relationship between work, health, and well-being, and looks at how organisations can manage well-being in practice and connect it to people management and wider organisational strategy. The unit also covers the key parts of well-being programmes, the stakeholders involved, organisational responsibilities, and the benefits of effective well-being management for both employees and employers.
Task 1: Understanding Wellbeing in the Workplace
AC 1.1 Evaluate two key ‘wellbeing’ theories, including how they can be applied to current issues of wellbeing in the workplace.
Theory 1: The PERMA Model (Seligman)
Seligman’s (2024) PERMA model, originating from positive psychology, identifies five essential elements of human flourishing: Positive Emotions (experiencing joy, gratitude, and contentment), Engagement (being fully absorbed in meaningful activities), Relationships (having supportive, authentic connections), Meaning (contributing to something greater than oneself), and Accomplishment (achieving goals and experiencing mastery). The model proposes that wellbeing is not merely the absence of illness but the active presence of these five elements.
Applied to current workplace issues, PERMA provides a comprehensive framework for addressing the post-pandemic wellbeing crisis. The CIPD (2024a) reports that stress-related absence has reached its highest level in over a decade, with workload, poor management, and lack of purpose cited as primary drivers. PERMA reframes wellbeing strategy from deficit-based interventions, such as reactive employee assistance programmes, to proactive flourishing-focused approaches. Organisations can enhance Positive Emotions through recognition and appreciation cultures, Engagement through job design that provides autonomy and challenge, Relationships through team-building and inclusive management, Meaning through connecting individual roles to organisational purpose, and Accomplishment through clear goals and development pathways. The model’s strength is its holistic, evidence-based approach; its limitation is that it may underemphasise systemic organisational factors such as workload and job insecurity that constrain individual flourishing regardless of personal resources.
Theory 2: The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model (Bakker and Demerouti)
The JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, cited in Dewe and Cooper, 2024) proposes that employee wellbeing is determined by the balance between job demands, the physical, psychological, and organisational aspects of work that require sustained effort, and job resources, the aspects that help achieve goals, reduce demands, and stimulate growth. When demands consistently exceed resources, employees experience strain, burnout, and health deterioration through a health impairment pathway. When resources are sufficient, employees experience engagement, motivation, and positive outcomes through a motivational pathway.
This model is particularly applicable to current workplace issues including hybrid working, where new demands such as digital fatigue, boundary erosion, and isolation may not be matched by new resources such as digital literacy support, flexible scheduling autonomy, and virtual social connection. It is also directly relevant to the workload crisis in sectors such as healthcare and education, where chronic understaffing creates demand-resource imbalance at a systemic level. The JD-R model’s strength is its organisational focus: it locates wellbeing responsibility in work design and organisational systems rather than placing the burden solely on individual resilience. Its practical value lies in providing a diagnostic framework: organisations can systematically audit the demands they impose and the resources they provide, identifying specific interventions that rebalance the equation (CIPD, 2024a).
AC 1.2 Explain, with examples, how wellbeing can be managed to support organisational goals.
Wellbeing, when strategically managed, directly supports organisational goals across productivity, retention, reputation, and compliance dimensions.
Reducing absence and presenteeism supports productivity goals. The CIPD (2024a) reports an average of 7.8 days’ absence per employee per year, with stress, musculoskeletal conditions, and mental health being the leading causes. Proactive wellbeing management, including manageable workloads, supportive management, and early-intervention occupational health services, directly reduces absence costs while addressing presenteeism, where employees attend work but perform below capacity due to ill health, which Deloitte (2024) estimates costs UK employers significantly more than absence. For example, an organisation implementing a comprehensive mental health strategy including Mental Health First Aiders, manager mental health awareness training, and a proactive employee assistance programme can measurably reduce mental health-related absence and improve productivity metrics.
Supporting retention goals through wellbeing investment addresses turnover costs. Organisations recognised for genuine wellbeing commitment, such as those achieving accreditations or featuring in employer awards, attract and retain talent more effectively than competitors who treat wellbeing as a compliance exercise. For example, implementing flexible working policies that genuinely accommodate diverse employee needs, rather than standardised arrangements that suit only some, demonstrates commitment to individual wellbeing that sustains engagement and reduces voluntary turnover (CIPD, 2024a).
Meeting legal compliance goals through wellbeing management ensures obligations under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, and the Equality Act 2010’s duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees are systematically fulfilled. Effective wellbeing management moves beyond minimum compliance to create environments that are genuinely healthy and supportive, reducing litigation risk while building a positive regulatory relationship (Lewis and Sargeant, 2023).
AC 1.3 Assess the potential value of adopting wellbeing practices in organisations.
| Dimension | Value to the Organisation | Value to Employees |
| Financial | Reduced absence costs (direct savings); reduced presenteeism (productivity gains); lower turnover costs; reduced litigation and compensation claims; Deloitte (2024) estimates £5 ROI for every £1 invested in wellbeing | Reduced personal financial burden of ill health; sustained earning capacity; access to employer-funded health and support services |
| Performance | Higher engagement driving discretionary effort; improved cognitive function and decision-making; enhanced creativity and innovation; better customer service quality | Greater job satisfaction; increased confidence and self-efficacy; sustainable high performance without burnout; sense of accomplishment |
| Cultural | Strengthened psychological contract; enhanced employer brand; attraction of values-aligned talent; creation of supportive management culture | Belonging and psychological safety; trust in employer; improved work-life balance; positive workplace relationships |
| Risk Mitigation | Reduced HSE enforcement risk; compliance with duty of care; protection against personal injury and discrimination claims; reputation protection | Reduced exposure to workplace hazards; protection of physical and mental health; access to early intervention and support |
The potential value is maximised when wellbeing practices are genuinely embedded in organisational strategy and culture rather than implemented as standalone programmes disconnected from the daily employee experience. The CIPD (2024a) emphasises that wellbeing washing, where organisations promote wellbeing initiatives publicly while failing to address the systemic causes of ill health such as excessive workload, poor management, and job insecurity, is not only ineffective but counterproductive, generating cynicism that deepens disengagement.
Task 2 – Stakeholder Roles and Organisational Context
AC 2.1 Identify ways in which each of the following workplace stakeholders can contribute to improvements in wellbeing at work. • managers • workers
Managers:
Line managers are the single most influential stakeholder in employee wellbeing because they shape the daily lived experience of work. Managers contribute by conducting regular one-to-one conversations that include genuine enquiry about wellbeing, not merely task progress; managing workload distribution equitably and intervening when demands become unsustainable; modelling healthy working behaviours including taking breaks, respecting boundaries, and using leave entitlements; recognising early signs of declining wellbeing and initiating supportive conversations using frameworks such as the mental health conversation guide provided by Mind (2024); facilitating flexible working arrangements that accommodate individual needs; and creating psychologically safe team environments where employees feel able to disclose concerns without fear of stigma or career consequences (CIPD, 2024b).
Workers:
Employees contribute to their own and colleagues’ wellbeing by engaging with available wellbeing resources and support services; communicating honestly with managers about workload pressures and wellbeing concerns before they escalate to crisis; supporting colleagues through peer networks, buddy systems, and inclusive behaviours that build team cohesion; taking responsibility for self-care including using annual leave, maintaining boundaries between work and personal time, and seeking professional support when needed; participating in wellbeing consultations, surveys, and feedback mechanisms that inform organisational wellbeing strategy; and contributing to a positive workplace culture by challenging bullying, harassment, and exclusionary behaviours. The responsibility for wellbeing is shared but not equal: organisations must create the conditions that enable individual wellbeing choices rather than placing the burden of coping with systemic problems on individual resilience (Dewe and Cooper, 2024).
AC 2.2 Explain, with examples, how wellbeing can interact with other areas of people management practice.
Wellbeing does not exist in isolation but interacts with, and is influenced by, virtually every area of people management practice.
In recruitment and onboarding, the wellbeing experience begins before the employment relationship is formalised. Realistic job previews that honestly communicate role demands prevent the wellbeing damage caused by expectation-reality gaps. Structured onboarding that includes early social integration, clear role expectations, and manager check-ins during the first 90 days reduces the anxiety and isolation that new starters frequently experience, directly supporting early-tenure wellbeing and retention (CIPD, 2024b).
In performance management, the approach to setting expectations, providing feedback, and managing underperformance has direct wellbeing implications. Developmental, coaching-based performance conversations that focus on growth, support, and achievable improvement generate positive wellbeing outcomes, while punitive, deficit-focused approaches create anxiety, reduce psychological safety, and undermine the trust that effective performance management requires. For example, an organisation that trains managers in strengths-based feedback and embeds wellbeing conversations into regular one-to-ones integrates wellbeing into the performance management cycle rather than treating them as separate processes.
In reward and recognition, perceived fairness in pay, equitable access to benefits, and genuine recognition of contribution directly influence psychological wellbeing through their impact on self-esteem, belonging, and the sense of being valued. Financial wellbeing initiatives, including salary advance schemes, financial education, and hardship support, address the cost-of-living pressures that currently represent a significant wellbeing concern for many employees (CIPD, 2024a).
AC 2.3 Analyse how organisational context shapes wellbeing.
Wellbeing is not experienced in a vacuum but is profoundly shaped by the organisational context in which work takes place.
Organisational size and structure influence wellbeing through their impact on communication, autonomy, and social connection. In small organisations, close relationships and informal communication can create strong belonging but may also produce boundary confusion, overwork through under-resourcing, and limited access to formal wellbeing infrastructure. In large organisations, formal wellbeing programmes and dedicated resources are more accessible, but bureaucratic structures may create anonymity, disconnection from purpose, and the feeling that individuals are replaceable rather than valued (CIPD, 2024a).
Sector and industry context fundamentally shapes the nature of wellbeing challenges. Healthcare workers face emotional labour, traumatic exposure, and physical demands; technology workers face screen fatigue, sedentary lifestyles, and always-on digital cultures; manufacturing workers face physical hazards, shift-work disruption, and repetitive strain. Effective wellbeing strategies must be contextualised to the specific demands and risks of the sector rather than applying generic solutions.
Organisational culture is perhaps the most powerful contextual determinant. Cultures that normalise long hours, reward presenteeism, stigmatise mental health disclosure, or treat wellbeing as a personal responsibility rather than an organisational obligation systematically undermine employee health regardless of the formal wellbeing programmes in place. Conversely, cultures where leaders model healthy behaviours, where seeking support is normalised, and where workload management is a genuine organisational priority create the conditions in which wellbeing practices can be effective (Dewe and Cooper, 2024).
Task 3 – Designing and Implementing a Wellbeing Initiative for Repas
[NOTE: Repas is the case study organisation provided in the assessment brief. Adapt the following to the specific details of your Repas case study.]
AC 3.1 Discuss Repas’ needs in relation to employee wellbeing and two wellbeing initiatives that would help address these needs.
Based on the case study analysis, Repas demonstrates two primary wellbeing needs. First, work-related stress and workload pressure: the combination of rapid growth, stretched resources, long working hours culture, and inadequate management support has created chronic stress across the workforce, evidenced by rising absence rates, declining engagement scores, and increased grievance activity. The JD-R model diagnosis reveals high demands without corresponding resources. Second, poor management capability in supporting employee wellbeing: managers at Repas are predominantly task-focused and lack the skills, confidence, and time to conduct wellbeing conversations, identify early signs of distress, or manage workloads proactively.
Initiative 1: Manager Wellbeing Capability Programme
A structured development programme equipping all managers with the knowledge, skills, and confidence to support team wellbeing through regular wellbeing conversations, early identification of distress indicators, workload management techniques, and appropriate signposting to professional support services.
Initiative 2: Proactive Stress Risk Assessment and Workload Management Framework
A systematic approach using the HSE Management Standards framework to identify and address the organisational causes of work-related stress, including workload distribution, role clarity, management support, relationships, change management, and employee control and autonomy.
AC 3.2 Design (in summary form) a wellbeing programme/initiative that would address one area of Repas’ needs. Your design summary should include the need being addressed, the key components of the programme, the people involved/affected, and the potential wellbeing benefits to be gained.
Programme: Manager Wellbeing Capability Programme for Repas
Need Being Addressed: Manager inability to identify, discuss, and support employee wellbeing, which perpetuates the stress culture and prevents early intervention before wellbeing issues escalate to absence, grievance, or resignation.
Key Components: (1) Half-day foundation workshop on the legal and ethical duty of care, recognising signs of mental and physical health decline, and the organisational wellbeing framework. (2) Interactive skills module on conducting wellbeing conversations using a structured but compassionate framework, practised through role-play with professional actors. (3) Workload assessment toolkit training, equipping managers with practical tools to audit, redistribute, and escalate workload concerns systematically. (4) Ongoing peer learning circles (monthly, 90-minute facilitated sessions) where managers share challenges, solutions, and reflections on wellbeing conversations. (5) Digital resource hub including conversation guides, signposting information, self-assessment tools, and recorded expert webinars for on-demand reference.
People Involved/Affected: All people managers (approximately [number] across Repas); the people management team as programme designers and facilitators; senior leadership as programme sponsors and role models; employees as beneficiaries of improved management practice; occupational health and EAP providers as referral partners.
Potential Wellbeing Benefits: Earlier identification and intervention for wellbeing concerns before they escalate; reduced stress-related absence; improved employee perception of management support; stronger psychological safety; enhanced manager confidence and reduced manager stress through competence development; cultural shift from reactive to proactive wellbeing management.
AC 3.3 Explain how your wellbeing programme would be implemented in a way that is suitable for Repas.
Implementation must be phased, context-sensitive, and supported by visible senior leadership commitment to succeed within Repas’ specific operational environment.
Phase 1 (Months 1–2): Secure senior leadership sponsorship through presentation of the business case linking manager wellbeing capability to absence reduction, retention improvement, and engagement gains. Senior leaders commit to publicly championing the programme and participating in the foundation workshop themselves, modelling the behaviours expected of all managers. Conduct a baseline measurement of current wellbeing indicators including absence rates, engagement scores, and employee perception of management support.
Phase 2 (Months 2–4): Pilot the programme with a cohort of 15–20 volunteer managers from across different departments to test content, timing, and delivery methods. Collect detailed feedback and refine the programme design based on pilot learning. Train internal facilitators from the people management team to deliver the programme at scale, supplemented by external experts for specialist modules.
Phase 3 (Months 4–10): Roll out the programme to all managers in cohorts of 15–20, scheduling sessions to minimise operational disruption while maintaining momentum. Launch the peer learning circles concurrently, initially facilitated externally before transitioning to peer-led facilitation. Deploy the digital resource hub with communications campaign ensuring awareness and accessibility.
Phase 4 (Month 10 onwards): Transition to ongoing sustainable delivery including integration into new manager induction, annual refresher workshops, and continuous peer learning. The programme becomes embedded in Repas’ management development framework rather than operating as a standalone initiative (CIPD, 2024b).
AC 3.4 Explain how your Repas wellbeing programme would be evaluated and monitored.
Evaluation should be designed into the programme from the outset using Kirkpatrick’s (2024) four-level framework adapted for wellbeing outcomes.
Level 1 (Reaction): Post-workshop participant feedback surveys assessing perceived relevance, confidence gained, and programme quality. Collected immediately after each workshop and peer learning circle session. Level 2 (Learning): Pre/post self-assessment of wellbeing conversation confidence and competence; scenario-based assessment of ability to identify wellbeing indicators and select appropriate responses; evaluated at the end of each programme cohort.
Level 3 (Behaviour): Manager behaviour change measured at 3 and 6 months post-programme through employee pulse surveys asking whether their manager conducts regular wellbeing conversations, responds supportively to concerns, and manages workload proactively. 360-degree feedback on wellbeing-related management behaviours. Monitoring of wellbeing conversation frequency through the people management system. Level 4 (Results): Organisational outcome measurement comparing pre-programme baselines against post-implementation data at 6 and 12 months: absence rates (overall and stress-related), engagement survey scores on management support and wellbeing questions, voluntary turnover rates, grievance activity, and EAP utilisation patterns.
Additionally, qualitative monitoring through focus groups with managers and employees at 6-monthly intervals captures the nuanced experiential impact that quantitative data may miss, including cultural shifts, unexpected challenges, and areas for programme refinement. Results are reported to the senior leadership team quarterly, maintaining accountability and demonstrating the return on wellbeing investment. The evaluation data feeds directly into continuous programme improvement, ensuring the initiative remains responsive to Repas’ evolving needs (Phillips, 2023; CIPD, 2024a).
References
CIPD (2024a) Health and Wellbeing at Work. Survey Report. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
CIPD (2024b) Wellbeing at Work. Factsheet. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Deloitte (2024) Mental Health and Employers: The Case for Investment. London: Deloitte.
Dewe, P. and Cooper, C.L. (2024) Work and Stress: A Research Overview. London: Routledge.
Kirkpatrick, J.D. and Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2024) Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation. 2nd edn. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Lewis, D. and Sargeant, M. (2023) Employment Law: The Essentials. 17th edn. London: CIPD Kogan Page.
Mind (2024) How to Support Staff Who Are Experiencing a Mental Health Problem. London: Mind.
Phillips, J.J. (2023) Return on Investment in Training and Performance Improvement Programs. 3rd edn. London: Routledge.
Seligman, M.E.P. (2024) Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being. 2nd edn. New York: Atria Books.