Lay Summary

The economic benefits of an organizational-level workplace program were evaluated. We found that productivity loss was reduced when managers received both monetary and facilitator support. This knowledge can help decision-makers to implement measures that are both effective and economically beneficial in terms of reducing work-related mental illness.

Background

Work-related mental illnesses create a vast economic burden for employers and society. Organizational-level workplace interventions are recommended to prevent these illnesses, but the knowledge about the economic benefits of such interventions is scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the economic benefit of an organizational-level workplace program for decreasing sickness absence.

Methods

A program was implemented in a large Swedish administrative region between 2017 and 2018, containing a monetary support approach (MSA) and an approach combining monetary and facilitator support (FSA). Cost–benefit analyses were used, where the results were compared to business as usual, using aggregated workplace sickness absence data to measure benefits, and wages and invoices to measure costs. Economic benefits of reduced sickness absence were based on the value of reduced production loss and direct sick pay costs, respectively. Sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the results.

Results

The program had a positive net benefit of MSEK1.7/year when measuring productivity loss, where the FSA had a net benefit (MSEK9.6/year) and the MSA had a net loss (MSEK-0.2 /year). A negative net benefit was derived when measuring direct sick pay costs (MSEK-2.7/year). For FSA, the implemented interventions were found to fit the respective workplace challenge to a larger degree compared to MSA. The intervention effect on sickness absence affected the net benefit the most.

Conclusion

Organizational-level workplace interventions can be economically beneficial for employers in terms of reducing the productivity loss. To achieve this benefit, implemented interventions need to fit the workplace challenge. Decision makers should not fear an initial high cost if evidence-based methods are used. A net loss was seen when only including reduced sick pay costs. However, future evaluations need to include other aspects than the value of reduced sock pay costs to fully capture the total net benefit.