紐時賞析／員工心理健康服務沒幫助？研究：「這項活動」是例外

研究指出，职场心理健康服务课程没有发挥任何正面影响，而心理韧性和压力管理训练似乎会产生负面影响。（纽约时报）

Workplace Wellness Programs Have Little Benefit, Study Finds

员工心理健康福利活动 研究指成效不彰

Employee mental health services have become a billion-dollar industry. New hires are presented with a panoply of digital wellness solutions, mindfulness seminars, massage classes, resilience workshops, coaching sessions and sleep apps.

员工心理健康服务已成为一个价值数十亿美元产业。新员工会有许多数位健康解决方案，包括正念研讨会、按摩课程、心理韧性工作坊、领导学和睡眠应用程式。

But a British researcher who analyzed survey responses from 46,336 workers at companies that offered such programs found that people who participated in them were no better off than colleagues who did not.

然而，一名英国研究员分析，有提供身心灵服务的这些公司，共4万6336名员工受访的回应显示，有接受心理健康服务的人并未比没参加的同事过得好。

The study, published this month in Industrial Relations Journal, considered the outcomes of 90 different interventions and found a single notable exception: Workers who were given the opportunity to do charity or volunteer work did seem to have improved well-being.

这份研究本月在「劳资关系期刊」发表，将90种不同干预措施产生的结果纳入考量，只发现一个值得注意的例外：有机会参加慈善和当志工的员工心理健康似乎真的有改善。

Across the study’s large population, none of the other offerings — apps, coaching, relaxation classes, courses in time management or financial health — had any positive effect. Trainings on resilience and stress management actually appeared to have a negative effect.

这项研究分析的广大人群中，其他产品—应用程式、教练课程、放松课程、时间管理和财务健全课程—都没有任何正面影响。训练心理韧性和压力管理的课程实际上似乎适得其反。

“It’s a fairly controversial finding, that these very popular programs were not effective,” said William J. Fleming, the author of the study and a fellow at Oxford University’s Wellbeing Research Center.

这项研究作者、英国牛津大学「身心健康研究中心」研究员弗莱明说：「这发现很有争议，就是这些非常受欢迎的课程竟成效不彰」。

Fleming’s analysis suggests that employers concerned about workers’ mental health would do better to focus on “core organizational practices” like schedules, pay and performance reviews.

弗莱明分析指出，关心员工心理健康的雇主最好关注「核心组织实务」，包括工作排程、薪资和绩效检视。

Fleming’s study is based on responses to the Britain’s Healthiest Workplace survey in 2017 and 2018 from workers at 233 organizations, with financial and insurance service workers, younger workers and women slightly over-represented.

弗莱明的研究是根据2017和2018年「英国最健康职场调查」，针对233个机构员工调查所得到的回复，其中金融和保险业员工、年轻员工和女性回复比率略高。

The data captured workers at a single point in time, rather than tracking them before and after treatment. Using thousands of matched pairs from the same workplace, it compared well-being measures from workers who participated in wellness programs with those of their colleagues who did not.

这项数据是在单一时间点询问员工，而非追踪他们接受对待前后的状况。数据使用来自相同职场数千个配对，比较有无参加心理健康课程的员工心理健康指标。

Adam Chekroud, a co-founder of Spring Health, a platform that connects employees with mental health services, and an assistant professor of psychiatry at Yale University, said Fleming’s study examined interventions that were “not highly credible” and measured well-being many months later. A blanket dismissal of workplace interventions, he said, risks “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

将员工与心理健康服务连结的平台「春天健康」共同创办人、耶鲁大学精神医学系助理教授切克劳德表示，弗莱明检视介入措施的研究「可信度不高」，且是在好几个月后才检测心理健康。他说，全面取消职场介入措施，等于冒「不分好坏，一竿子打翻一条船」的风险。

“There is recent and highly credible data that things like mental health programs do improve all those metrics that he mentions,” Chekroud said.

切克劳德说：「有可信度高数据显示，心理健康课程等措施确实提升他提到的所有指标。」

文／Ellen Barry 译／罗方妤