WHY BTFA? ...?

In 2017 the UK Government commissioned this study.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/658145/thriving-at-work-stevenson-farmer-review.pdf

Below are some highlights... including ￡9.98 ROI, for every pound spent on related training, from a study conducted in Australia!

Interestingly, a separate study (dated July 2023) into the ROI of 'Insights discovery' which is "built to help people understand themselves, understand others, and make the most of the relationships that affect them in the workplace" by the ROI Institute, Inc in collaboration with Indeed found that, for every dollar invested, that dollar is returned – along with an additional $20.63 (Equiv to ￡16.96 as of today's xc rate).

What makes BTFA? (Believe-Think-Feel-Act - The neuroscience of change) truly fascinating, is the extensive validation from client testimonials. It has proven to be more profound, impactful, and practically useful compared to most other training programs individuals have encountered throughout their careers. This includes Lean methodologies, Psychometric-based developments, as well as Occupational Health and Safety (OHS/H&S) training, which invariably focus on enhancing personal, team, and process performance.

Some students go a step further by expressing how BTFA? has not only made their previous training more understandable but has also added value to it, even from experiences dating back 10 to 20 years. They've come to realise the reasons behind the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of what they were taught, gaining insights into the 'why' and 'how', it aligns with the workings of the human brain.

The suggestion, if we draw parallels from such research and training methods that only touch on the depths of BTFA?, is that ￡100k invested, to ensure your leadership team is speaking in terms of brain function (behind mental health and personal performance), as the foundation for all they do and aspire to, could convert to ￡1,696,000.00 added value.

Highlights from the Reports Executive Summary;

? There is a large annual cost to employers of between ￡33 billion and ￡42 billion (with over half of the cost coming from presenteeism – when individuals are less productive due to poor mental health in work) with additional costs from sickness absence and staff turnover.

? The cost of poor mental health to Government is between ￡24 billion and ￡27 billion. This includes costs in providing benefits, falls in tax revenue and costs to the NHS.

? The cost of poor mental health to the economy as a whole is more than both of those together from lost output, at between ￡74 billion and ￡99 billion per year.

At a time when there is a national focus on productivity, the inescapable conclusion is that it is massively in the interest of both employers and Government to prioritise and invest far more in improving mental health.

The UK can ill-afford the productivity cost of this poor mental health*. It could be argued that these costs are the “normal” cost of being alive and doing business.

Our work suggests strongly that this is not the case.

? Deloitte’s analysis of the case studies where investments have been made in improving mental health show a consistently positive return on investment… a finding which is bolstered by a number of academic meta-studies which demonstrate the benefits of good work for mental health and key workplace enablers.

As this review is going to press (2017), the Lancet has also published findings from a study in the Australian Fire Service which found that a manager mental health training programme could lead to a significant reduction in work-related sickness absence, with an associated return on investment of ￡9.98 for each pound spent on such training.

? This is borne out by our own conversations with over 200 organisations which have uncovered a number of successful investments, activities and approaches in improving the mental health of employees.

*Other studies suggest Mental Health is now an even greater component of performance and will continue to present problems in future generations, following the Covid19 pandemic.

Summary of the recommendations:

? Produce, implement and communicate a mental health at work plan

? Develop mental health awareness among employees

? Encourage open conversations about mental health and the support available when employees are struggling

? Provide employees with good working conditions and ensure they have a healthy work life balance and opportunities for development

? Promote effective people management through line managers and supervisors

? Routinely monitor employee mental health and wellbeing.

?These mental health core standards are drawn from best practice and, as far as possible, are evidence based ... continue reading in the article.

Immediate Concerns

These recommendations assume leaders can adequately define subjective / ambiguous terms like ‘Good working conditions’, 'Healthy work life balance', ‘Effective people management’, and know how to 'Monitor wellbeing'.

Unless and until leaders understand the basic requirements of the human brain, that is, if it is to function optimally when surviving the increasingly complex socio-technical environment it navigates daily, the terms 'good', 'healthy' and 'effective' will continue to be defined differently by individual leaders.

This is inevitable, as leaders, in nearly all fields, are systematically not educated to understand applied neuroscience. As a result, they hold vastly different ‘Beliefs’ in what good looks like (e.g. Command and Control vs Servant Leadership and everything in between).

To compound the problem, leaders, in all walks of life, have an infinite array of styles, determined by their own levels of fear and stress (also brain function).

It reminds me of the old joke, "Ask 10 economists for a forecast and you'll get 12 different answers." Unfortunately, neither mental health or the economy are subjects to joke about.

Accepting the standardised approach to education omits any consideration of brain function, the greater objective is to form a common and consistent definition of ‘Good’, IF we’re to see a high-performance culture emerge from effective leadership in organisations, or at national levels, where the issue of 'Mental Health' is addressed and improved, rather than just recognised, discussed and provisioned for …

To do that, we must understand, (objectively and with facts), the needs of the adult human brain in the work environment.

We can no longer afford to tolerate the ambiguity of the past and allow for subjective definitions ... we must standardise our understanding of ‘people’ the same way we establish standards to follow in our mechanistic and technological processes.

For that, there is BTFA? - well worth the investment!

For more information on this groundbreaking approach to leadership development, organisational performance and culture change, visit us here www.duxinaroe.com