Does wellbeing have a (high) visibility problem?

Ask people what is critical to ensuring a healthy and safe environment on a construction site and they will quite quickly start talking about hard hats, high visibility clothing and steel toe capped boots.

Whilst personal protective equipment is a component in controlling exposure to occupational risks, there are four other more substantive factors to be considered such as elimination and substitution of hazardous practices. These are steps that can be taken at an organistional rather than individual level.

I think that wellbeing or wellness activities often fall into the same area as hard hats, safety boots and high visibility clothing.

Whilst well intentioned, wellbeing initiatives are often delivered individualistically and in isolation with little thought to how, and whether, they make a difference to the overall health, happiness and overall performance of people in an organisation.

So what can we do? Here are 3 ideas to explore if you want to explore a truly holistic wellbeing approach for your organisation.

Hierarchy of Controls - National Institute of Safety & Health

Hierarchy of Controls - National Institute of Safety & Health

1) Define what you mean by wellbeing

It is often assumed that we know what wellbeing means. But this is a big assumption. It can vary considerably from person to person, team to team and organisation to organisation.

I once worked with a company that had teams working in four different standalone functional areas which had the terms “health”, “wellness” or “wellbeing” in their title.

These teams did not have a shared definition of what they meant by health or wellbeing. Their work was distinct and focused in specific areas but it all involved the broader health and happiness of people in the organisation. When asked, the teams had never thought about how their work interacted and had never considered a more holistic approach.

My preferred definition of wellbeing is feeling good and functioning well. It has its roots in academic research and it reflects both positive emotions and positive performance. It is easy to remember and tends to resonate with most people I speak to.

But this may not be the right definition for you, or your organisation.

Why don’t you start by asking people what a good day at work looks like for them and consider the factor and themes that this produces.

Aaron Jarden's Me, We & Us wellbeing model

Aaron Jarden's Me, We & Us wellbeing model

2) Think Me, We and Us

If you want to develop wellbeing approaches that permeate across functions, teams and individuals then it is critical to think systematically.

One approach to do this is to consider how wellbeing initiatives will impact on individuals, teams and the organisation as a whole. Or as Aaron Jarden, a leading wellbeing researcher, refers to it: take a me, we and us perspective.

Some questions to consider at each level might be:

  • Me – what wellbeing approaches will make the most difference to an individual working within the organisation?
  • We – what wellbeing approaches will be most effective in encouraging positive and collaborative working relationships amongst leaders and teams?
  • Us – what will make the biggest difference to the organisation as a whole in lifting its collective wellbeing?

3) Evaluate your organisational approach to wellbeing

Whilst it is often tempting to build and launch wellbeing programmes and initiatives based on what “feels” needed, there is value in taking time to evaluate your organisation’s current wellbeing approach and identifying your strengths and the opportunities for development.

Undertaking a wellbeing evaluation or audit might help highlight where you will get the most value for future investment in wellbeing – and you might be surprised where this is.

I recommend that organisations consider the following 6 areas:

  1.  Commitment – The commitment, visibility and profile of wellbeing within your organisation.
  2. Wellbeing development and literacy – Opportunities for people to explore what wellbeing means to them and their colleagues and the factors and activities which positively influence wellbeing.
  3. Environment – The extent to which the working space enables and encourages wellbeing.
  4. Wellbeing support – The quality and number of programmes and initiatives that are designed to provide high quality and specific health guidance and support.
  5. Enablers – Policies, procedures and practices which underpin, support and promote wellbeing.
  6. Current wellbeing levels – A regular measurement of the wellbeing of people across the organisation.

Visibility for all the right reasons

You can use these 3 areas to start a conversation about what wellbeing means for you and your organisation and the steps you can take to can put the health, happiness and performance of people at the centre of what you do.

There is of course, no specific recipe to building the perfect wellbeing approach.

It’s in everyone’s interest to develop high quality, evidence informed approaches to wellbeing, which will make the most amount of difference to the most amount of people.

Let’s give wellbeing visibility for all the right reasons.


highviz vest.png

References  & resources:

Is the whole greater than the sum of its parts?

Charlotte Axon explores what makes teams effective

What makes teams effective?

What makes teams effective?

For most of us, being part of a team is a key part of our working lives. According to the Bureau of Labour Statistics, today’s youngest workers will hold an average of 12 - 15 jobs in their lifetime.

I’ve been lucky enough to explore team development through my occupational psychology research[1]. And I’d like to share some key findings – what makes teams highly effective, and how these factors can be used in your everyday work.

What do we know about teams?

Teams are not necessarily linked via organisational charts, but exist where members have highly interdependent relationships. Team members make decisions and solve problems together, and rely on each other for success. Often they spend a large amount of time working together, which makes it even more important to understand how the composition of individuals equates to outcomes.

Leadership matters

My research addressed the impact of a team development intervention over 12 months, and found that leadership was key to increasing team effectiveness.

The manager of the team made a conscious change to their leadership approach, which focused less on individual targets and more on individual development. The manager expected that as each individual worked closer to ‘their full potential’ the overall team effectiveness (i.e. sales) would increase – and it did.

Following the intervention, the team reported higher levels of:

  • Clarity over meeting outcomes;
  • Understanding of how their individual role contributes towards team goals;
  • Commitment towards helping achieving team goals

You can read about the findings in the main report.

So is team effectiveness enhanced when we focus on individuals?

A recent study by Google aimed to “discover the secrets of effective teams”. Replicating a method used to determine what makes a great manager, the researchers used a combination of qualitative assessments (i.e. peer ratings) and quantitative measures (sales performance) to define ‘effectiveness’.

These findings suggest that team effectiveness was less about individual team members, but more about how they worked together. You may be intrigued to learn of the factors which were found to be related (and unrelated) to team effectiveness.

The five most influential factors were (in order):

  1. Psychological safety (i.e. members are confident taking risks around each other, with no negative judgements for admitting mistakes)
  2. Dependability (i.e. members complete high quality work on time)
  3. Structure and clarity (i.e. members have a clear understanding of expectations, how to fulfil these, and how individual performance impacts team effectiveness)
  4. Meaning (i.e. members find the work to be personally meaningful)
  5. Impact (i.e. members see that their work can make a difference and contributes to the organisation’s goals)

Perhaps surprisingly, factors not found to be related to team effectiveness included individual personality, co-location of teammates, individual performance, workload size, or team size.

So what does this tell us?

Although this research looked specifically at Google employees, the findings tell us something crucial about teams. And it’s not rocket science. Feeling supported, ‘safe’ and confident amongst your peers matters.

Have you ever joined a new team, or jumped into a new role, only to find that you are suddenly unsure or uneasy about bringing up new ideas? Have you ever been in a situation where you know your colleagues have great insight and ways of working to bring to the table, but they don’t ever mention them? These sorts of scenarios reflect reduced psychological safety in a team, and can stem from situations such as individuals having their views dismissed in public forums by more senior colleagues.

Interestingly, the Google research also concluded that individuals scoring higher on psychological safety were less likely to leave, were more open to the power of diverse opinion and brought in higher revenue. Demonstrating a strong business case for fostering psychological safety in an organisation.

So what can we learn from this?

Psychological safety

Establish whether team members feel comfortable suggesting ideas in front of others, and in making mistakes without fear of judgement. Fostering psychological safety requires that managers share information with team members about their own preferences and working styles, and actively encourage them to do the same. Make it clear that you want to hear their opinions.

It is also worth considering the three organisational behavioural scientist Amy Edmondson proposes (see her TEDx talk):

1.      Frame the work as a problem with learning, not execution;

2.      Acknowledge your own fallibility;

3.      Encourage curiosity and ask lots of questions


Establish whether team members feel that their work provides a sense of personal and professional fulfilment, and whether it considers their individual development needs and areas of interest, rather than solely skills and ability. Provide positive feedback on an area they are excelling at, and offer to help in areas they struggle with. You can also act as a role model by publically expressing your gratitude when someone helps you out. Have a look at this KPMG study: “Motivating Employees Through a Deeper Sense of Purpose”.


Establish whether team members feel that their work contributes to making positive change, and how current processes may be impacting on individual wellbeing. Create a shared vision that clearly demonstrates how each member’s work contributes to the wider team and organisational goals. It is important to regularly reflect on your work and how it impacts stakeholders.

Prosocial motivation (the motivation to benefit others)

Capitalise on the fact that organisations see higher performance, more organisational citizenship behaviours and reduced turnover where individuals are motivated to promote the benefits of others. Through their focus on others, these individuals can be guided to build strong interpersonal relationships and reduce dysfunctional conflicts in order to generate effective team outcomes.

Some final thoughts

Although team membership and goals often change, research and practice shows us that there are some simple steps that we can take to increase the likelihood of better team performance.  In particular organisations can; 

  • establish clear expectations around how diversity of views are welcomed and considered;
  • encourage team behaviour which focuses on helping others;
  • ensure that team members gain a sense of personal satisfaction from their work; and
  • highlight how their actions impact on a broader scale.

If you want your teams to collaborate and perform to their maximum potential, a great starting point would be to consider whether this lists applies to the teams in your organisation. And if not, explore the reasons why. 

Charlotte Axon, October 2017

About Charlotte and how to find out more

Charlotte has a Masters in Occupational Psychology and works at the University of Sheffield. She is currently trialling an innovative approach to talent attraction. To explore more about Charlotte's research, you can read her original paper here

[1] Jordan, T., & Axon, C. (2013). Nine ways to improve team effectiveness – A case study report. British Psychological Society. Book of Proceedings for DOP Annual Conference, Chester, UK.

Positive universities: bring passion and optimism but don’t forget the purpose.

Positive universities: bring passion and optimism but don’t forget the purpose.
  • What would be happen if in addition to earnings, employability and academic attainment, we also measured the legacy of higher education in terms of a graduate’s wellbeing?
  • What would a flourishing university mean for staff and students?
  • What would a Positive University look and feel like?

From last Friday’s International Positive Education Network (IPEN) conference it is clear that leaders at the highest levels in higher education, public health and economic policy, joined by world-leading scholars and public policy shapers are both curious and serious about exploring these questions.

And so they should be.

Creating a tailored approach to work


The personalisation of goods, services and activities appears to becoming ever more prevalent and popular. From the comfort of your sofa, you can now personalise your trainers, order made-to-measure clothes and even add your own lable to chocolate and hazelnut spread.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the possibilities for greater personalisation spilled over to the world of work? Where rather than being asked to fulfil a specific job, task or activity, you were encouraged to tailor and tweak aspects of your role based on your personal strengths, passions and interests.

I have been exploring this concept with organisations through my job crafting workshops. Job crafting enables employees to take a more personal approach to their work. I discovered job crafting through my Masters studies at the wonderful Centre of Positive Psychology at the University of Melbourne and it became the focus of my capstone research.

Job crafting is a process where employees actively change or tailor how they approach, undertake or think about their work to better suit their own personal strengths, preferences and interests. The concept was first outlined by Amy Wrzesniewski and Jane Dutton in a 2001 research paper and studies within the field have been steadily growing.

I was drawn to job crafting as research has shown that job crafting behaviour is related to a number of positive outcomes for staff. Specifically, a number of studies have found a correlation between active job crafting and reported levels of happiness, wellbeing, engagement and job satisfaction.

There are three main types of job crafting:

·      Task crafting refers to tangibly changing aspects of how we undertake our work including designing, adding or removing tasks.

·      Relational crafting refers to shaping how we relate and engage with others, including building and adapting our relationship with co-workers.

·      Cognitive or perception crafting describes the reframing of how we think about our work in general including the value and significance it plays to us personally and to others.

Through my workshops, I provide an overview of job crafting and outline how it is can be nurtured amongst the workforce using examples from innovative organisations such as Google and Logitech amongst others.

In addition to exploring the concept of job crafting we discuss different approaches and opportunities to personalise work and attendees share stories of when they have job crafted previously.

I am always impressed with the vast array of examples given by different groups in respect of when they had tailored or changed the physical, relational or perceptive elements of their jobs.

These examples include an IT technician who described how he had incorporated a love for testing and trying to crash and break software before its wider release into his role and was now the “go to guy” for this work. A student recruitment manager at a University became tearful describing a personal passion for outreach work driven by personal circumstances for was pivotal in her deciding to start an outreach program within the Faculty they worked in.

There have been smaller or “micro” examples of how individuals shaped or changed their approach to work. A number of participants recognised that they became more energised and engaged when they had a personal connection with colleagues and had sought out opportunities and scheduled catch-ups with clients and co-workers by phone or in person rather than relying on email.

Others described how they used images and pictures to remind themselves of the importance and significance of their work, including theatre workers having photos of past performances pinned to their walls or customer support teams having letters of thanks from clients and colleagues that they had helped.

These examples vary in size and scale, but they all count as job crafting as they are personal changes made by the employee themselves to aspects of their role or working lives with no obligation or requirement to do so. Indeed this autonomy and agency in making the change is argued to be one of the key factors which explains the positive benefits of job crafting. Simply stated, it enables us to bring a sense of control to aspects of our work.

I am always careful to collect meaningful and objective feedback from my workshops to understand whether they are making a difference. In collaboration with Dr Gavin Slemp and Dr Peggy Kern from the University of Melbourne I have formally investigated the impact of a number of workshops that I have run, analysing whether they have led to changes in job crafting behavior and made a difference in their approach to work. Together, we presented preliminary findings at the 2016 European Conference of Positive Psychology and are in the process of writing these up for formal publication.

I look forward to sharing more details of these results in the future. It will shine further light on the benefits, and any limitations, of job crafting and some of the barriers and obstacles which employees face in trying to actively craft their roles.

If you don’t want to tackle an academic paper, there are also some excellent articles available across the web including this one in the Harvard Business Review. You may also want to check out this video of Amy Wrzesniewski giving a presentation as part of a re:Work sponsored event at Google.

In the meantime, if you are curious about job crafting and want to know more then get in touch.

For those organisations which are committed to embracing opportunities to maximize the diverse talents, interests and passions of their employees, job crafting has powerful potential. Who wouldn’t want to work and stay at a company which took a positively distinctive and tailored approach to how they encouraged and supported their staff to thrive at work?