Wellbeing in the UK
To assess the state of wellbeing in the UK, we first need to understand what it is. Definitions vary greatly, with some placing emphasis on healthy relationships whilst others stress positive economic conditions. One description which appears to capture the full picture defines wellbeing as “a condition of holistic health… physical, emotional, social, and cognitive”. We like this as it encompasses all of the various ways through which we can adjudge our health.
With our inclusive understanding of wellbeing, let’s add some local context. This mind blowing report finds that an average of just under half a million new people are referred to mental health services per month in the UK. The government reports that over a quarter of Britons are obese, and the NHS has attributed 10% of premature deaths to physical inactivity.
A culturally social country, almost all adults say that they have a support system if they need it, though a recent spike in loneliness has been strongly linked to a misuse and overuse of smartphones.
Wellness as a business expense
A conventional business’ spending looks something like this:
Source: Mera Experiences
Ironically, although the lion’s share of spending goes to employees’ wages, almost none of it supports their personal development. It’s clear why companies spend like this: employees, marketing and ops all have an obvious causal relationship with investment returns. The increased exposure from a new website or ad-campaign will generate new leads. Poaching a talented Head of Sales will do the same.
Though staff wellbeing hasn’t been framed in the same way, we’ll explore why this is a costly oversight; one that goliaths like Google, Microsoft and Deloitte have identified and are capitalising on.
How skipping wellness cuts returns
Deloitte describes “absenteeism, presenteeism, and labour turnover” as the three distinct ways that avoiding wellness investment hurts profits. Let us quickly define each one. Absenteeism is the frequent absence of an employee from work, presenteeism occurs when an employee attends work despite being unfit, and labour turnover describes the rate at which employees leave a company and are replaced.
In the case of absenteeism and presenteeism, businesses are paying for labour that isn’t being fulfilled. Presenteeism, described by Deloitte as the biggest drain on profits, creates a whole cascade of additional costs. When deadlines slip, client relationships suffer, and underperforming projects demand micromanagement, which in turn pulls resources away from other priorities.
Labour turnover is another significant cost to the bottom line. Recruiting and training a new employee averages £8,000, so losing 20 staff in a year can cost £160,000 – funds that could have been invested elsewhere in growth. Not to mention the risk associated with replacing colleagues you can trust. Keeping these employees engaged, healthy, and supported transforms that potential loss into retained value.
Wellness spending in relation to ROI: The Data
So, what happens when wellness is budgeted for? As per Deloitte, every £1 invested in employee wellbeing returns £4 in profit. CIPD similarly find that organisations investing in wellbeing are four times more profitable. A report by GivenWell found that proactive wellness support delivers an average 5:1 ROI. The list goes on, and the point is clear.
It’s not only a question of if but how. Reactive action, though still producing an ROI, is relatively less effective than an ongoing universal wellbeing programme (see chart, below). Don’t wait for a flood of employee complaints to prompt change; instead, replace token gestures with initiatives that genuinely engage your staff from the get-go. An ongoing culture of care not only strengthens your profits but also your reputation within your industry, which protects your longer term financial stability.
Conclusion
Wellbeing isn’t a luxury or perk, it’s a strategic business move. Despite the UK wellbeing economy being valued at over $200 billion, most businesses still undervalue it, giving proactive companies a significant first-mover advantage. Ongoing, preventive initiatives are statistically shown to be 40% more profitable than reactive ones – meaning the time to act is now.
