Psychosocial risk is still a relatively new concept for some businesses, and we sometimes find people are unsure of what they should be doing, how often, or whether they need to be doing anything at all.
Epigroup has a team of WHS Consultants who are also qualified psychologists. They specialise in psychosocial risk, and educate businesses every day on how to manage their psychosocial risks, and stay compliant under the WHS Act. Here, they each break down a common psychosocial myth, and what to do to avoid failing into the belief.
Psychosocial Myth 1: We Don’t Have a Problem with Bullying, Discrimination, or Sexual Harassment
Answered by Lesley Brown, Psychologist and Lead WHS Consultant, Epigroup
A common assumption in many workplaces is “We don’t have any reports of bullying, discrimination, or sexual harassment, so these issues must not exist here.” While the absence of reports might seem like a positive sign, it’s crucial to understand that relying solely on incident reports as the measure of workplace safety is not always reliable.
Why Reports Alone Don’t Tell the Whole Story
There are many psychosocial factors that can affect whether people feel comfortable coming forward with issues, meaning the lack of reports doesn’t always equal a problem-free workplace. Barriers to reporting might include:
- Workplace culture: If there’s a belief that complaints are not going to be taken seriously, acted upon, or there will be retaliation, people may stay silent.
- Trust: A perceived lack of organisational commitment or leadership capability can deter people from raising issues.
- Limited options for reporting: Workers may not feel comfortable with the existing reporting mechanisms, especially if they don’t offer options for confidential or anonymous avenues.
- Inadequate support: If the support options are not trauma-informed or seen as unhelpful, people may avoid reporting altogether.
Even in environments that seem supportive, people might feel unsafe or fear repercussions from speaking up. This is why relying purely on incident reports can give a false sense of security.
Legal Requirement: Positive Duty
Under 47C of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), PCBU’s have a positive duty to take proactive reasonable and proportionate measures to so far as is reasonably practicable to prevent the drivers of sexual harassment, discrimination, and victimisation.
Rather than waiting for evidence these hazards to surface, organisations are now required to actively manage these psychosocial risks to support an inclusive, safe, and respectful environment for everyone. Learn how to manage psychosocial risks here.
Positive Duty is:
- A PCBU responsibility
- Enforceable
- Proactive and preventative
- Requires continuous assessment and evaluation
How Do You Know if Your Efforts Are Effective?
Regularly monitoring relevant data and workplace culture indicators is key. For instance, rather than simply tracking training engagement, analysing trends in reported interpersonal behaviours and employee engagement, measuring before and after any new interventions, can provide valuable insights into the impact and wider results of any actions.
Monitoring the effectiveness of response and support options for those who may have been impacted is also overlooked. Overall, the goal is to ensure that controls are not only in place, but are trusted and effective in supporting employees.
Psychosocial Myth 2: We Did a Risk Register of Psychosocial Hazards Last Year, So We Don’t Have Any More Work to Do in This Space
Answered by Monica Crosetta, WHS Consultant, Epigroup
According to the Commonwealth WHS Regulations 2011, a PCBU must manage psychosocial risks by:
- identifying hazards;
- eliminating risks so far as is reasonably practicable and if not, minimising risks so far as is reasonable practicable;
- maintaining control measures so they remain effective; and
- reviewing control measures
A PCBU’s Responsibilities
Completing a risk register suggests that the PCBU has only identified the hazards, and potentially highlighted controls to eliminate or minimise psychosocial risks. This is a great start but, similar to managing physical hazards, the process is ongoing.
A PCBU must work to ensure that the controls implemented are suitable and working as intended on an ongoing basis. This should include regular consultation activities and careful consideration of selected data indicators to inform control effectiveness. This monitoring will also confirm that new hazards have not been introduced when implementing controls. PCBUs must also consider reviewing psychosocial risk and ongoing consultation when there is change made at the workplace.
Psychosocial Myth 3: Standardised Risk Assessment Tools Are For Physical Hazards, So They Are Pointless for Psychosocial Risk Management.
Answered by Noel Bautista, WHS Consultant, Epigroup
The difference in nature between physical hazards (which are often tangible) and psychosocial hazards (which can be more complex and difficult to quantify) can sometimes lead to the dismissal of standardised risk assessment tools.
It is true that psychosocial risk management can have its own unique requirements, however, this does not mean standardised risk assessment tools can’t be (and shouldn’t be) adapted for psychosocial risks. Here are some points to consider…
Underlying Principles of Risk Management
While the nature of the risks may differ between physical and psychosocial risks, the underlying principles of risk assessment (identify the hazard, assess the risk, control the risk, monitor control performance) are fundamentally applicable.
Tailoring Your Tools to your Organisation
Currently, there is no perfect tool for managing psychosocial risk. If you are implementing a psychosocial risk management system, focus on utilising tools and methodologies that are fit for purpose given your organisational culture, operational needs, and the nature of your risks.
For many organisations, this means starting with familiar risk management tools and adapting them to support the risk management requirements – rather than dismissing standardised methods outright. Effective consultation with the workforce is going to be critical for ensuring your tools are adapted appropriately.
Assessing Acute Events Which Can Cause Psychological Harm
Standardised risk assessment methods traditionally assess risk in a linear fashion where they assume that exposure to a physical hazard creates a hazardous event, which ultimately leads to consequences. Although many psychosocial risks are more complex and require additional considerations (i.e. the combination and cumulative effects of exposure to psychosocial hazards), some psychosocial hazards can be assessed using linear risk assessment techniques.
For instance, hazards that can cause psychological harm from acute exposure or a single event (e.g. bullying, sexual harassment, violence and aggression), generally, can be assessed using standardised methodologies.
Guidance, Codes of Practice, and Standards
There are several resources available that can assist you in effectively assessing your psychosocial risks – many of which are based on principles and methodologies commonly used in the management physical safety risks. For instance, the ISO 45003 standard, which provides guidance for managing psychosocial health and safety at work, is adapted from ISO 45001 (occupational health and safety management systems).
Standardised risk assessment tools can be useful for managing psychosocial risks. They are familiar to many organisations and, if adapted appropriately, can be an effective starting point when implementing a psychosocial risk management system. However, they’re not perfect and require additional consideration and adaptation when assessing more complex psychosocial hazards or combinations of hazards.
Psychosocial Myth 4: The Risk of Suicide is The Only Outcome We Should Focus Our Psychosocial Risk Management On
Answered by Laura Bennett, WHS Consultant, Epigroup
Psychosocial risk management should be a proactive process that considers the full spectrum of psychological and physical harm that workers may experience following exposure to psychosocial hazards. While suicide prevention is critical, focusing solely on suicide overlooks other harmful outcomes, such as:
- post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
- vicarious trauma,
- burnout
- anxiety
- depression
- sleep disorders.
Even in cases where no formal diagnosis of illness or injury is made, these conditions can escalate into more severe consequences over time.
Risk based, not outcome based
Managing psychosocial risks not only protects workers by fostering a psychologically safe and healthy workplace, but it is also beneficial for organisations by minimising costs and disruptions associated with staff turnover and absenteeism, and can improve productivity.
Failing to consider the broader risks to worker’s health and safety could place the PCBU at risk of not fulfilling their duty under Work Health and Safety (WHS) legislation to either eliminate or minimise these risks so far as is reasonably practicable.
Unlike critical risk approaches which focuses on fatality prevention, WHS psychosocial legislation advocates for a risk-based rather than outcome-based approach to psychosocial risk management.
Focusing solely on suicide prevention overlooks the PCBUs’ broader responsibilities to prevent harm by ensuring workers and other persons are not exposed to risks to their psychological or physical health and safety.
Under WHS legislation, PCBUs have a duty to identify and manage all psychosocial hazards that could reasonably cause harm to workers’ health and safety, regardless of whether they lead to mental health conditions or more serious outcomes.
Need a Hand?
If you need help designing, implementing, or maintaining your psychosocial risk management system, our team of psychologists are here to help.
They can help you evaluate your existing measures, review your current activities and data, and offer tailored recommendations to ensure your workplace remains a safe and inclusive environment for all.