IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmen00/0000601.html

An economic model to assess the costs and benefits of workplace mental wellbeing interventions: A flexible tool for employers and decision makers

Author

Listed:
  • Karina Watts
  • Hannah Ross
  • Emily Gregg
  • Matthew Taylor

Abstract

Poor mental wellbeing is one of the leading causes of long-term sickness absence from work and may lead to absenteeism, presenteeism and staff turnover, costing UK employers an estimated £51 billion annually. This study uses economic modelling to provide data on costs and benefits to employers who are considering implementing a workplace intervention to improve wellbeing. Additionally, the analysis is used to assess any changes in employee outcomes (e.g., productivity and staff turnover). A cost-consequence model with a one-year time horizon was developed to assess the impact of workplace mental wellbeing interventions. Because all workplaces are different, it is not useful to present one single base case to generalise across all settings. Instead, the model generates a series of hypothetical case studies, with varying levels of absenteeism, presenteeism and staff turnover, as well as different levels of productivity and staff replacement costs. Several mental wellbeing interventions are compared with ‘no intervention’ (current practice) to calculate the total incremental costs and incremental cost per employee. In a hypothetical case study with 50 employees and an intervention cost of £100, the intervention has a net cost saving of £4,207 per employee. Savings are due to reductions in absenteeism and presenteeism. Sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis assess the impact of varying each input, to reflect that inputs will vary substantially for each individual organisation and setting. The intervention is more likely to be cost saving when the baseline levels of absenteeism, presenteeism and staff turnover are high, and the intervention cost is low. Mental wellbeing interventions may influence a range of outcomes, but outcomes demonstrating a mental wellbeing benefit to employees may be challenging to translate into monetary value. The model can be used by decision makers and employers to understand the potential economic and wellbeing implications of implementing workplace mental wellbeing interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Karina Watts & Hannah Ross & Emily Gregg & Matthew Taylor, 2026. "An economic model to assess the costs and benefits of workplace mental wellbeing interventions: A flexible tool for employers and decision makers," PLOS Mental Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(4), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmen00:0000601
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmen.0000601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmen.0000601
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmen.0000601&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmen.0000601?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmen00:0000601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: mentalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.