Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 163 views
Employee resistance to management-driven wellbeing initiatives
Rachel Cook
BSA Work, Employment and Society Conference 2023, September 13th - 15th, Glasgow, UK
Swansea University Author: Rachel Cook
Abstract
Despite the CIPD’s (2022) findings that 51% of surveyed organisations now have a standalone wellbeing strategy, 33% increased their wellbeing budget and 61% believe employees are keen to engage with wellbeing initiatives, employee receptiveness to workplace wellbeing, and related initiatives, remain...
| Published in: | BSA Work, Employment and Society Conference 2023, September 13th - 15th, Glasgow, UK |
|---|---|
| Published: |
2023
|
| URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa64372 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract: |
Despite the CIPD’s (2022) findings that 51% of surveyed organisations now have a standalone wellbeing strategy, 33% increased their wellbeing budget and 61% believe employees are keen to engage with wellbeing initiatives, employee receptiveness to workplace wellbeing, and related initiatives, remains an area of debate. Spence (2015) advocates that, whilst the focus of wellbeing initiatives is invariably a positive discourse (insofar as they aim to improve physical, psychological, and social functioning), it cannot be assumed that employees will be positively disposed towards them. An important theme emerging in the critical management literature (Lipman 2014) is a disconnect between management and employees in this regard. Management too acceptingly presume employees will want, and be receptive to, any wellbeing initiative put in place, for the ‘obvious benefits’ this would bring (Manner 2020), i.e., mutual gains. Critical management studies critique the managerialist perspective of not sufficiently considering other contextual factors within the organisation that may prevent employees from wanting, or being able, to engage with these mechanisms, such as, organisational history and culture, apathy towards workplace wellbeing, a lack of engagement and/or resistance to organisational involvement in wellbeing. In this research, there were five research sites, covering five different industries and geographical regions of the UK. A total of 71 semi-structured interviews were conducted, 23 with management and 48 with employees. Management participants were those in the organisations primarily responsible for employee wellbeing. Employee participants were those who did not have any management responsibilities but were ‘front-line’ staff, and so, the primary users of wellbeing initiatives. The research found that wellbeing initiatives were driven almost entirely by management. Employees’ understanding of wellbeing was not sufficiently considered during the development of wellbeing initiatives. The three key themes which emerged in relation to employees’ understanding of wellbeing were work-life balance, mental and physical health, and resilience. Examining the extent to which the wellbeing initiatives in place in the research sites positively impacted these aspects of wellbeing, there were mixed opinions of their effectiveness. Management-driven wellbeing initiatives, led by management perceptions of what wellbeing initiatives should include, resulted, from the perspective of enabling employees to achieve their own understanding of wellbeing, in ineffective wellbeing initiatives. As such, employees did not fully engage with them, as they did not see any merit in doing so, speaking directly against the idea of mutual gains. The research advocates for the development of employee-led wellbeing initiatives as a means of overcoming resistance to engagement with workplace wellbeing. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: |
BSA Work, Employment and Society Conference 2023, September 13th - 15th, Glasgow, UK |
| College: |
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences |