**The gap between what organizations spend on wellness and what their
workforce actually needs is enormous — and growing.**
The average EAP utilization rate in Canadian organizations sits at
approximately 6%. That means 94% of the people who may need support are
not accessing it — while the organization continues paying for a
service and calling it a wellness strategy.
This is not a criticism of EAPs. They serve a real purpose for acute,
individual crises. The problem is the fundamental misclassification:
What the evidence says actually works.
A landmark review by Maslach & Leiter (2022) synthesized four decades of
burnout intervention research. Their conclusion was unambiguous:
individual-level interventions produce short-term relief at best.
Organizational-level interventions — structural, cultural,
leadership-level — are what produce lasting change.
The evidence-supported organizational interventions include: workload
management protocols with genuine enforcement, meaningful autonomy over
work processes, regular validated wellness measurement with results fed
back to leadership, leadership development specifically targeting
The CSA Z1003-13 compliance gap most Alberta organizations have.
CSA Standard Z1003-13 on Psychological Health and Safety in the
Workplace provides a framework for 13 psychosocial factors that
employers are expected to address. While the standard is currently
voluntary, it is increasingly referenced in WCB adjudication and human
rights proceedings as the established standard of care for psychological
Pull the cost of your EAP contract for the last year. Divide by the
number of employees who actually used it. Calculate the
cost-per-utilizer. Then compare that to what a structural assessment
and targeted intervention would cost. I will bet the math surprises
Evidence-based insights on the science of human performance at work. Published every Tuesday. Free, always.
Subscribe on LinkedIn →