A growing disconnect between employee feedback and meaningful organisational response is emerging as a critical concern for Australian workplaces, according to new research from Gallagher.
Findings show that only 52% of employees believe action will be taken after they provide feedback – raising questions about how effectively companies are responding to the insights they collect. For Dr. James Allen, director of people experience and innovation at Gallagher, gathering feedback is just one part of the equation.
“It’s not enough to simply consult or gather feedback; it must be followed up with action. By doing so, we can prevent executive blind spots and ensure that our employees feel heard and valued,” Allen said.
Now in its third year, Gallagher’s research defines workplace wellbeing as a state of emotional and physical health, combined with a sense of purpose at work. The findings point to clear consequences for organisations that fail to support employee wellbeing. Workers with lower reported wellbeing also showed significantly higher rates of absenteeism and presenteeism – where employees continue to work despite feeling unwell.
“Presenteeism in particular presents a really hidden cost or risk for organisations. If employees are physically present in the work environment, yet they feel emotionally or psychologically that they shouldn’t be there, they’re at a higher likelihood of experiencing both physical and probably psychological injury,” Allen said.
He noted that psychological injury claims are not only more frequent among employees with low wellbeing, but also more costly. The median time away from work for these types of injuries is close to 40 weeks, significantly exceeding the recovery time for physical injuries.
The research found that organisations vary in how they approach employee wellbeing – from those with minimal systems to those employing comprehensive, multi-disciplinary strategies. What matters, Allen said, is whether the approach is fit for purpose and generates measurable outcomes.
One common shortcoming is relying too heavily on lagging indicators such as turnover or claims data. Allen argued that proactive measurement, including ongoing feedback and check-ins, can offer earlier warnings: “Measurement can be really useful in giving you lead indicators or warning signs and signals about where you should direct your attention.”
While formal surveys remain widespread – particularly in larger organisations – Gallagher’s findings also pointed to the importance of informal feedback mechanisms. Regular conversations between managers and employees about workload, stress levels, and support can help organisations track wellbeing without added cost.
Allen urged companies to move away from one-size-fits-all programs and to consult employees when developing new initiatives: “Too often we see organisations go for the bright, shiny program, or maybe what the executive team has heard a competitor is doing without first validating, is that what we need in our context, and is it what our employees are asking for?”
Instead, defining success metrics before launching a new wellbeing program is key. Regular monitoring can then help determine whether the program is making a measurable difference – not just in employee wellbeing, but also in areas like absenteeism, presenteeism, and overall performance.
“Monitoring and measuring are really important components to ensure the longevity of any wellbeing strategy,” Allen said.
