I read two unrelated articles in the November 11, 2004, issue of the Globe and Mail. The first article was reporting on the most recent study by Professor Linda Duxbury of Carleton University and released by the Public Health Agency of Canada. The study is intended as a discussion paper between work-life conflict and the demands on the public health care system. Dr. Duxbury has done an excellent job of mining the database she and her colleague Chris Higgins from the University of Western Ontario developed from survey results of some 31,500 Canadian employees.
They have presented compelling information on role overload experienced by 58% of the respondents in their survey. Put very simply people are working harder than ever and they are burning out. Statistics were released last year that showed the average rate of absenteeism in Canada has increased from 8 person days per year to 9 person days per year in 2002.
The second article that caught my eye was the announcement by Marsh & McLennan that they were planning to lay off 3,000 employees. This was in response to a sharp drop in its third-quarter profits as the fallout continued over New York Attorney-General Elliot Spitzers bid-rigging investigation. What have these two articles in common?
Over the last few years the Global Business and Economic Roundtable on Addiction and Mental Health has demonstrated that we are now firmly rooted in an economy based on mental performance and that the mind, a healthy mind, is the ultimate productivity weapon. The roundtable has provided compelling evidence of the high cost of mental disabilities to business. For example it is estimated that depression alone costs the Canadian economy 32 billion dollars in direct and indirect costs each year. At least 35% of these individuals are suffering from depression due to their workplace. In her discussion paper Linda Duxbury is suggesting that the government provide tax credits to companies who run healthy organizations because the health care system, in other words the tax payer, is shouldering the cost for unhealthy workplace practices.
On a proportionate basis the numbers in the US are the same. This leads us back to the Marsh & McLennan lay-offs. Marsh is a company that depends on the minds of its employees to succeed. The implications of their actions will be felt on two levels by the employees that remain. First, fewer people will be asked to do more work that will lead to greater stress and the mental and physical deterioration that follows. Secondly the uncertainty and job insecurity that the lay offs trigger will add an additional layer of emotional stress. The outcome is predictable. The employees will come to work for fear of losing their jobs. They will literally muddle through the day. But the key questioned that needs to be asked is How are they now contributing the profitability and competitiveness of the company? Marsh and all the companies that operate like them are committing corporate lobotomies.
Years ago constant reengineering and down sizing was referred to as creating anorexic organizations. That analogy may have been appropriate for manufacturing companies that were depended on traditional forms of labor. However, in an economy that is based on mental performance, a companys success depends on knowledge, creativity, ingenuity, quick thinkers, clear thinkers and problem solvers. It depends on employees who are mentally healthy and whose minds can operate at peak performance. It seems that the moment a company has a poor quarter and they lay off stay is counter productive. They are conducting a lobotomy on themselves at the peril of future success and at a huge cost to society and to tax payers. |
