The Health and Safety Executive have recently released figures that show that workplace deaths are at an all-time low. Between April 2009 and March 2010, 151 people were killed in UK workplaces, down from 178 the previous year. While this improvement is good to see, it leaves me wondering about how well equipped most organisations are in terms of dealing with the challenges involved in supporting employees through bereavement and loss situations. When I was researching my Loss, Grief and Trauma in the Workplace book (http://astore.amazon.co.uk/neilthomp-21/) I was concerned at how few of the organisations I have links with have any sort of plan, policy or strategy for addressing such issues - and yet, of course, loss and grief issues will affect all workplaces sooner or later. It strikes me that this is an aspect of workplace well-being that is being seriously neglected.

Research can sometimes be counterintuitive. That is, the findings go against what we would have expected - they challnege so-called common sense. Helping us to realise that some of the things we take for granted have no basis in truth  is therefore an important role that research plays for society. However, sometimes the value of research comes from confirming what has been taken for granted for a long time - reaffirming that it does have a basis in fact. An example of the latter was recently reported in the Observer in an article that described the research opf Andrew Oswald of Warwick University. His recent study has shown a strong link between happiness and productivity, with negative emotions producing lower levels of productivity. So, perhaps the idea that an organisation's most important resource is its human resource - its people - was the correct assumption all along. Perhaps we really do have to take workplace well-being seriously.

From time to time I am asked to offer advice to organisations about problems relating to alcohol problems in the workplace. The issues involved are very complex, but there are usually ways in which the challenges involved can be addressed reasonably effectively. However, whenever I deal with such matters I am left wondering just how many of the problems associated with alcohol are simply left untouched, swept under the carpet because of the sensitivities involved. So, I suspect that what actually gets dealt with is just the tip of the iceberg.

At the time fo writing no one has posted a comment in relation to my previous blog post about subtle bullying. And yet, in recent weeks quite a few people have agreed with me about the significance of subtle bullying when I have raised it with them (for example on training courses I have been running). Do we have a culture of silence around bullying? Is it too painful or threatening a subject to be discussed or is it just that nobody has got anyting to say about the matter?

From time to time people talk to me about problems they are having in their workplace. Sometimes what they talk to me about is bullying, pure and simple, and they realise this and talk about it in openly these terms. However, it is often the case (and this has happened to me a couple of times recently) that people talk to me about their problems but they have not thought about them as being the result of bullying. This is because the bullying has been very subtle, and so the person on the receiving end does not necesssarily identify the behaviour as bullying - they just feel unhappy about how things are going and struggle to put their finger on why that is.

I have now recognised a pattern to how things go when I talk in terms of subtle bullying. The first reaction is disbelief ('No, I'm not being bullied - I would know it if I were'), but after I explain further what I mean by subtle bullying, doubt starts to creep in. I explain that bullying is about the abuse or misuse of power and that some people do this very carefully and skilfully. It amounts to manipulating people inappropriately into giving the bully their own way. Bullying isn't just about threats and openly aggressive behaviour. That is only one type of bullying. There is a more insisdious bullying that comes from, for example, constant undermining of someone's self-esteem; using emotional pressure to get their own way; and similar tactics. Once we explore together these subtleties we then reach the third stage of the process: from, 'No, I'm not being bullied' through 'I'm not sure any more' to 'You know what, you are right, I am being bullied. They are using illegitimate means to get me to do what they want (for example to stop raising concerns about pressures of work) and they are walking all over my dignity in the process'. Subtle bullying is still bullying and should therefore have no place in the modern workplace.

Much of what is written about workplace well-being has a very strong indivdiualistic focus. The implicit (and sometimes explicit) assumption appears to be that each of us is totally responsible for our own well-being.  This approach to stress has proven disastrous over the years. The common assumption that stress is the sign of a weak individual has haunted us for decades, often creating a vicious circle where someone who is experiencing stress then feels even greater pressure because of the stigma and sense of  failure involved - and on top of that, is less likely to seek help at the time they need it most, for fear that asking for help will simply confirm that they are a weak person who can't cope. There is much more to stress than this simplistic model (social and organisational factors, for example),  but this has not  stopped an individualistic approach to stress being so widespread. So, it is important to recognise that it is not  only the prevention and management of stress that is a shared responsibility, as all aspects of well-being are better understood as shared responsibilities. The sooner we start to take on board the implications of this, the sooner we can start building a more substantial platform for promoting well-being.

Alcohol-related problems are a major headache for so many people in families and in communities, but of course the workplace is not immune from the harm that alcohol misuse can bring, not only to the person concerned, but also to a wide range of other people - and, of course, to the organisation itself. Some organisation have a carefully worked out policy for dealing with such problems if or when they arise, and may have specially trained staff who are reasonably well equipped to respond to the challenges involved. Others, by contrast, have no policy, no trained staff and no idea how they will respond to an incident if they have to face one. Clearly organisations in the latter category are taking a significant risk that organisations in the former category have managed to avoid.

A key part of leadership is the shaping of workplace cultures to make them conducive to effectiveness for the organisation in meeting its goals and for staff and managers in achieving their own objectives, personally and professionally. The basic idea is that leadership creates win-win situations. Good leaders help their staff (their 'followers') to fulfil their potential while helping the organisation to do what it needs to do. This has significant implications for workplace well-being. An effective leader can make a major contribution to promoting well-being and (here's the win-win bit again), being successful in promoting well-being in turn creates the sort of atmosphere (and culture) in which leaders can flourish and their efforts be appreciated. So, making clear links between leadership and well-being is an important step forward for us.

The furore over allegations that Gordon Brown had bullied his staff has generated a lot of column inches in the press, including many letters from members of the public. The general tenor has been one of condemnation of bullying, but it has been worrying that some people seem to have little or no understanding of what is involved or how devastating it can be to people's lives. I was particularly concerned by one letter to the Guardian newspaper that claimed that people complaining about being bullied should be sacked for being wimps. Sadly, from conversations I have been involved with over the years, this sort of attutude is not uncommon in some quarters. It suggests a very macho approach to the workplace: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. I wonder how many people would be able to sustain that sort of attitude if they were able to see first hand what damage bullying can do to people.

Many people use the terms well-being and wellness interchangeably, but my concern is that this is likley to cause confusion. Wellness has a close relationship with health, as does well-being, of course. However, I believe it is important to distinguish between health and well-being (while not forgetting that they influence each other in significant ways). It is quite possible to be in good health but with very poor well-being (for example, a perfectly healthy person who is deeply distressed for whatever reason) and for people to be ill and yet have a high level of well-being (for example, someone who has a chronic health condition but who is very happy being looked after by loving family members).

To understand the complexity of human experience (both in the workplace and beyond it) we need to understand both health and well-being - and the similarities and differences between them.