Personal well-being or organisational well-being?

The topic of corporate wellness is everywhere. Conventions, digital platforms, employee services. But what are we really talking about? Work-life balance? Psychophysical well-being? Stress reduction? Development of individual skills? Solutions that make life easier? There is a bit of everything, but one thing is clear: when we talk about well-being in the company, we mean individual well-being. In fact, psychological support is also multiplying. Organisations, once places where the person was 'just a number', now invest in his or her well-being. How far we have come.

But. Doesn't all this focus on wellbeing mean that there is too much ill-feeling in the companies? Then let us come to the point. Do organisations primarily wish to take charge of individual malaise by offering services to individuals, or are they also interested in understanding whether individual malaise is an organisational symptom? Because, in the latter case, they should take charge of themselves by questioning the causes, rather than just acting on the effects. So, the causes. We have selected three.

First. In the company, the highest role continues to decide. This has a lot to do with the malaise. Why? Because those at the top who have to make decisions know little about the problems and opportunities that arise in the field in day-to-day contact with customers and users: so they get anxious and try to control everything, with endless meetings. Conversely, those at the bottom experience those problems and opportunities every day but, even though they often know the solution, they cannot decide. And this generates frustration, anger and reduces people to mere executors, fuelling alibis and de-responsibility. Question: do we help individuals to be better off within this organisational setting or do we evolve the setting?

Second. The individual is still considered the minimum unit of the organisation. In other words, we still act as if performance is generated by the individual. Of course, what the individual does is important. But in today's businesses, there is no longer such a thing as individual-only performance: in order to achieve adequate products and services, and to gain in speed and flexibility, it is essential to work together. And how can team spirit grow if everyone's attention is turned upwards, towards the boss, who is considered the most important customer, and who is used to managing people individually rather than fostering collaboration?

Third. If performance, rather than individual activities, depends on how individuals work together, today, the minimum unit of the organisation is the team. Shouldn't we help people working together to face and solve as many situations as possible that they encounter every day? For this to happen, however, we need a psychologically safe organisational context that does not cultivate comfort but healthy tension, that stimulates people to confront each other, have productive conflicts, take initiatives, learn from mistakes, find new ways of doing things. Having fun. In short, using one's resources to contribute to the common goal. Is this what happens in our working environments?