Mental Wellbeing,
Work and Productivity
Rapid Report
A publication of the Mental Health Million project,
October 10, 2021

Introduction
Work is an integral part of life that occupies the majority of our waking time. For example, the 2020
American Time Use Survey, revealed that working adults spend an average of 7.6 hours of their day
working, with only time spent asleep being higher (ATUS, 2020). The environment in which people work,
the people that they interact with, and the roles and responsibilities that they undertake, all contributeheavily to an individual’s mental wellbeing. At it’s best, work provides people with a strong sense ofidentity, brings purpose, and offers economic stability (Modini et al., 2016). But with an increasing focus
on productivity and always needing to be available, especially as more people are working remotely, rates
of stress and burnout have been on the increase (Indeed, 2021).
As companies become more aware of the challenges of mental wellbeing, there is an increasing need tounderstand the relationship between work and mental wellbeing so that they can ensure a more mentally
healthy and fulfilled workforce.
In this rapid report, we provide an overview of the way that work and mental wellbeing interact basedon 168,000 responses from the Mental Health Million Project in 2021, an on-going large-scale mental
wellbeing surveillance initiative that maps trends in mental wellbeing of the Internet enabled world acrossthe globe (Newson and Thiagarajan, 2021). The Mental Health Million project uses a comprehensive
assessment of mental wellbeing called the MHQ that assesses 47 elements of mental function on a life
impact scale to position individuals on a spectrum from Distressed to Thriving (Newson and Thiagarajan,2020), as well as a host of demographic and life experience factors.

MHQ Scale of Mental Wellbeing
Distressed Struggling
-100

2-50

Enduring
0Managing Succeeding Thriving
50100

150200Mental Wellbeing and Employment
Employment provides multiple life benefits from income to a sense of purpose, and for many, a sense ofself-identity and self-worth.
Overall MHQ Score x Employment

Indeed, the data among working age adults(aged 18-64) reveals a strong relationshipbetween employment and mental wellbeing.
Average MHQ scores were 70.7 for those
employed compared to 30.9 for those whoEmployed/Self employed

70.7

Unemployed

30.9

Not able to work

7.9

0

were unemployed and 7.9 for those who are

10unable to work. Overall, 45% of unemployed

20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Average MHQ Score

adults are distressed or struggling with theirmental wellbeing, compared to only 23% of those who are employed. Those unable to work experienceeven greater difficulties with 58% distressed or struggling with their mental wellbeing. Conversely, 41%of employed adults are succeeding or thriving in their mental wellbeing compared to only 22% of thoseunemployed and 13% of those unable to work.

45% of unemployed adults are distressed or struggling with their mentalwellbeing, compared to only 23% of those who are employed
The specific elements of mental wellbeing that differed most significantly between those employed andthose unemployed were Drive and motivation, Outlook and optimism, Self-worth and confidence andPlanning and organization. These differences in outlook were also accompanied by substantially higher
Feelings of sadness, distress and hopelessness, Suicidal thoughts and intentions and Unwanted, strange
or obsessive thoughts in the unemployed. Those unable to work have similarly high levels of thesechallenges as the unemployed along with greater Physical health issues, Experience of pain and lower
Energy levels.

Major dimensions of difference between the Employed and the Unemployed

Drive andmotivation

3

Outlook andOptimism

Self-worth andconfidence

Planning andOrganization

Feelings ofsadness,
distress andhopelessness

Suicidalthoughts andintentions

Unwanted,strange orobsessivethoughts

We note that while this trend is consistent

Percentage of those Distressed orStruggling with their Mental Wellbeing

across all age groups, younger adults fare
far worse across all categories pointing to80%

young adults (see Newson et al., 2021 for our70%

Mental State of the World Report). Among
18-24 year olds, a full 46% of those employed
were distressed or struggling with theirmental wellbeing (a similar percentage is also
found for those studying; not shown here).

% Distressed or Struggling(Negative MHQ Scores)

a widespread crisis in the mental health of60%
50%
40%

20%
10%adults are different and therefore a one size

0%

23%

Allagesfits all solution to overcoming these mental
efficient solution for employers.

45%

30%

Furthermore, the specific issues of younger

wellbeing challenges is often not the most

58%

18-24

Employed/Self Employed

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

Age Group

UnemployedNot able to work

Altogether, these data suggest that employment and jobs are a key social driver of mental wellbeing in
the global internet enabled world. However, while work seems quite important, if we are to thrive, it is nota guarantee that we will not suffer mental health challenges as other life factors are also known to beimportant to our overall mental wellbeing (Newson et al., 2021). In addition, work itself can also bring its
own stresses and difficulties depending on a person’s particular work environment (Theorell et al., 2015;
Aronsson et al., 2017).

Mental Wellbeing and Productivity
Evidence has long suggested that poor mental health leads to productivity loss (Kessler and Frank,
1997; Lim et al., 2000; Hemp, 2004; Burton et al., 2008; Alonso et al., 2011; Evans-Lacko and Knapp,
2016; Bubonya et al., 2017), and economic loss (Marcotte and Wilcox-Gök, 2001; Stewart et al., 2003;
Trautmann et al., 2016; Whiteford, 2021). However, these studies have examined a limited range ofmental health symptoms, often focusing on mood disorders such as depression and anxiety, andtypically consider mental health challenges as an all or nothing phenomenon, rather than looking acrossthe spectrum of mental wellbeing in the general population. The data reported here provide a novel
insight into the relationship between mental wellbeing and productivity by incorporating a comprehensive
range of mental health symptoms spanning 10 mental health disorders and covering the spectrum of
mental wellbeing risk status.
This data demonstrates the specific relationship at the population level between mental wellbeing andproductivity across the spectrum from Distressed to Thriving, where days missed increased exponentiallyas MHQ scores decreased. Among the employed, those with high MHQ scores (Thriving) missed on

4average only 0.4 days of work per month while those with the lowest MHQ scores (Distressed) missed on
average 11.5 days of work a month.
Productivity is not all about missed days
Relationships between Productivity andMHQ Score among employed peopleof work, however. When it comes to being
present but being less productive – also
16

emerges with employed adults who are

14

Distressed having on average 14.3 low

12productivity days per month in contrast
to only 3.2 low productivity days for those
who are Thriving. Altogether, assuming
low productive days may range from a 20%

Average Number of Days

called presenteeism – a similar picture

10864

to 50% loss of productivity on average,

2

Distressed mental wellbeing results in an0estimated range of 12 to 17 days of lost

-100

Distressed Struggling-50

Enduring

0productivity per month while those who areThriving see lulls in productivity impacting
just 1.27 days per month.

Managing Succeeding Thriving
50100

150

200

MHQ Score

Average Days of Work Missed

Average Days of Work Less Productive

Distressed mental wellbeing results in an estimated range of 12 to 17
days of lost productivity per month while those who are Thriving see animpact to productivity of just 1.27 days per month.
The exponential structure of this relationship suggests that the productivity gains in terms of days ofwork are highest at the lowest end of the MHQ scale. An Increase by 10 MHQ points for those on thelow end of the scale can result in an additional 1.5 to 3 days of work on average, while an increase at thetop end of the scale would add only an additional half day of work. However, this also highlights thateveryone, even those thriving, see some lulls in productivity as part of one’s natural fluctuations.

What are the individual factors that drive these changes in productivity?
While overall raw MHQ scores are more highly correlated to productivity than any individual element(with a correlation of 0.5), the most significantly positively contributing or protective factors among
the employed were Energy and Emotional resilience (correlations of -0.26 and -0.24 respectively forthe employed, and -0.35 and -0.30 when including those unemployed and not able to work). Detractingfrom productivity were Feelings of sadness, distress and hopelessness, Guilt and blame, Confusion or
slowed thinking, Experience of pain, Repetitive actions or compulsions, Suicidal thoughts or intentions,5Unwanted, strange or obsessive thoughts and Traumatic flashbacks (correlations of 0.23 to 0.27). For
younger adults ages 18-24 Obsessive, strange or unwanted thoughts were a far more significant factor.

Individual MHQ factors correlated with productivity in the employed(and employed, unemployed & not able to work combined)

EnergyEmotional
resilience-0.24 (-0.30)

Feelings of sadness,
distress andhopelessness

Experienceof pain

Repetitive actions
or compulsions

0.24 (0.31)

0.23 (0.28)-0.26 (-0.35)

Guilt and blame

0.24 (0.28)

Confusion or
slowed thinking

Suicidal thoughts
or intentions

Unwanted strange or
obsessive thoughts

Traumaticflashbacks

0.24 (0.31)

0.23 (0.28)

0.23 (0.27)

0.24 (0.32)

0.27 (0.34)

For example, the graphs below show the average number of days lost or unproductive for different life
impact rating selections for the most significant detracting and protective factors, Feelings of sadness,
distress or hopelessness and Energy levels.

Change in productivity for different ratings on the two most correlated elements
Feeling of sadness, distress & hopelessness

Energy Levels

2020151510510

500%00%12No Problem

6BdaysdaysA

3456Life Impact Rating

7891

Severe Problem

No Problem

Average Days of Work Missed

23456

Life Impact Rating

Average Days of Work Less Productive

789AssetHow can companies move the needle?
The reasons people experience any of these contributing challenges are complex and can besubstantively different in the aggregate across different demographics such as age group, and job roles.
While some of the challenges can arise from aspects of work life, lifestyle factors, relationships andlife traumas outside of work are typically substantial contributors. It is important for every organization
to measure and understand the mental profile of its workforce and the specific factors that are driving
mental distress and struggles. This will help address some of the key underlying challenges morestrategically and effectively and track whether initiatives are moving the needle. Often the answers
may be structural in nature such that significant gains can be made with small changes to policy orwork factors that ease the stressors driving a negative spiral of mental wellbeing and productivity.
For example, a workplace that is poorly connected with public transport might result in a cascade ofstresses for hourly workers such as struggling to pick up children and so on. This might be solved bestby a company bus rather than therapy. Conversely, positive company cultures that encourage socialconnection and a sense of purpose can have a positive impact on mental wellbeing resulting in a positive
feedback loop with productivity.

Taking a preventative approach to mental wellbeing

MeasureUnderstandManageWhat % of yourworkforce are distressedor struggling?

What are the major
contributing factors
for each segment?

What are key structuraland cultural factors thatcan make an impact?

As the changing economic and social landscape increases pressure on thecurrent and future workforce, it is imperative that organizations take aproactive preventative approach to mitigate mental health challenges.

7Increasingly, research is pointing to poor or unproven outcomes across the vast array of mental wellness
apps and programs available for the workplace today (Larsen et al., 2019; Song and Baicker, 2019; Laganet al., 2021). The Mental Health Million data shows that half of people Distressed or Struggling do notseek help largely because they don’t think it will help or don’t know what kind of help to look for (Newson,2021). As the changing economic and social landscape increases pressure on the mental health of thecurrent and future workforce, it is imperative that organizations take a proactive preventative approachto mitigate mental health challenges. We advocate for data driven leadership that goes beyond thesimple implementation of post facto, band aid solutions. Such an approach must be informed by anunderstanding of key drivers specific to the organization, in order to develop strategic and targeted
policies and interventions that address them. More importantly, organizations who are committed topositively shaping the mental wellbeing of their workforce, will reap the benefits of a thriving workforce
who collectively drive positive organisational outcomes.

8References:
Alonso, J., Petukhova, M., Vilagut, G., Chatterji, S., Heeringa, S., Üstün, T.B., et al. (2011). Days out of role
due to common physical and mental conditions: results from the WHO World Mental Health surveys. Mol
Psychiatry 16(12), 1234-1246. doi: 10.1038/mp.2010.101.
Aronsson, G., Theorell, T., Grape, T., Hammarström, A., Hogstedt, C., Marteinsdottir, I., et al. (2017). A
systematic review including meta-analysis of work environment and burnout symptoms. BMC Public
Health 17(1), 264. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4153-7.
ATUS (2020). Available: https://www.bls.gov/tus/ [Accessed].
Bubonya, M., Cobb-Clark, D.A., and Wooden, M. (2017). Mental health and productivity at work: Does what
you do matter? Labour Economics 46, 150-165. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2017.05.001.
Burton, W.N., Schultz, A.B., Chen, C.Y., and Edington, D.W. (2008). The association of worker productivity
and mental health: a review of the literature. International Journal of Workplace Health Management 1(2),78-94. doi: 10.1108/17538350810893883.
Evans-Lacko, S., and Knapp, M. (2016). Global patterns of workplace productivity for people withdepression: absenteeism and presenteeism costs across eight diverse countries. Soc Psychiatry
Psychiatr Epidemiol 51(11), 1525-1537. doi: 10.1007/s00127-016-1278-4.
Hemp, P. (2004). Presenteeism: at work--but out of it. Harv Bus Rev 82(10), 49-58, 155.
Indeed (2021). Employee Burnout Report [Online]. Available: https://www.indeed.com/lead/preventingemployee-burnout-report [Accessed].
Kessler, R.C., and Frank, R.G. (1997). The impact of psychiatric disorders on work loss days. Psychol Med27(4), 861-873. doi: 10.1017/s0033291797004807.
Lagan, S., D'Mello, R., Vaidyam, A., Bilden, R., and Torous, J. (2021). Assessing mental health appsmarketplaces with objective metrics from 29,190 data points from 278 apps. Acta Psychiatrica
Scandinavica 144(2), 201-210. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13306.
Larsen, M.E., Huckvale, K., Nicholas, J., Torous, J., Birrell, L., Li, E., et al. (2019). Using science to sell apps:
Evaluation of mental health app store quality claims. npj Digital Medicine 2(1), 18. doi: 10.1038/s41746019-0093-1.
Lim, D., Sanderson, K., and Andrews, G. (2000). Lost productivity among full-time workers with mentaldisorders. J Ment Health Policy Econ 3(3), 139-146. doi: 10.1002/mhp.93.

9

Marcotte, D.E., and Wilcox-Gök, V. (2001). Estimating the employment and earnings costs of mental
illness: recent developments in the United States. Soc Sci Med 53(1), 21-27. doi: 10.1016/s02779536(00)00312-9.
Modini, M., Joyce, S., Mykletun, A., Christensen, H., Bryant, R.A., Mitchell, P.B., et al. (2016). The mental
health benefits of employment: Results of a systematic meta-review. Australas Psychiatry 24(4), 331-336.
doi: 10.1177/1039856215618523.
Newson, J., Pastukh, V., Sukhoi, O., Taylor, J., and Thiagarajan, T. (2021). "Mental State of the World 2020,Mental Health Million project", (ed.) S. Labs.).
Newson, J., and Thiagarajan, T. (2021). Dynamic Dataset of Global Population Mental Wellbeing.
Newson, J.J., and Thiagarajan, T.C. (2020). Assessment of Population Well-Being With the Mental Health
Quotient (MHQ): Development and Usability Study. JMIR Ment Health 7(7), e17935. doi: 10.2196/17935.
Song, Z., and Baicker, K. (2019). Effect of a Workplace Wellness Program on Employee Healthand Economic Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 321(15), 1491-1501. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.3307.
Stewart, W.F., Ricci, J.A., Chee, E., Hahn, S.R., and Morganstein, D. (2003). Cost of Lost Productive WorkTime Among US Workers With Depression. JAMA 289(23), 3135-3144. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.23.3135.
Theorell, T., Hammarström, A., Aronsson, G., Träskman Bendz, L., Grape, T., Hogstedt, C., et al. (2015). A
systematic review including meta-analysis of work environment and depressive symptoms. BMC PublicHealth 15, 738. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1954-4.
Trautmann, S., Rehm, J., and Wittchen, H.-U. (2016). The economic costs of mental disorders: Do oursocieties react appropriately to the burden of mental disorders? EMBO reports 17(9), 1245-1249. doi:
10.15252/embr.201642951.
Whiteford, H. (2021). The Productivity Commission inquiry into mental health. Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Psychiatry, 00048674211031159. doi: 10.1177/00048674211031159.

10