The stress risk assessment your duty already requires

An organisational wellbeing audit is a comprehensive assessment of employee wellbeing, organisational culture, and the systems and practices that influence both. Unlike standard engagement surveys that give you scores, a wellbeing audit provides strategic insight into the "why" behind the numbers—connecting wellbeing patterns to business outcomes, cultural dynamics, and organisational performance.

A wellbeing audit typically examines: employee wellbeing indicators across physical, mental, social, and financial dimensions; organisational culture and climate, including psychological safety, trust, and belonging; leadership practices and behaviours that support or undermine wellbeing; systemic factors like workload, role clarity, resources, and support systems; and business impact, connecting wellbeing patterns to turnover, absence, productivity, and performance.

What makes Craig's approach different is the combination of a named framework with FRSPH Fellowship-level public health expertise and board-level business perspective. Reading several data sources together surfaces connections a single survey cannot, and Craig interprets those patterns within your organisational context, applies wellbeing science, and develops actionable strategic recommendations. You don't just get data—you get insight that drives governance-level decision-making.

Traditional engagement surveys measure employee satisfaction and commitment—they tell you how people feel about their work and organisation. Wellbeing audits go deeper, examining the underlying factors that influence both engagement and performance: physical health, mental wellbeing, social connection, sense of purpose, organisational support, and systemic pressures.

Engagement surveys give you scores; wellbeing audits give you strategic insight. A survey might tell you engagement is 65%—but why? What's driving it? How does it connect to absence, turnover, performance? Which interventions will actually move the needle? Wellbeing audits answer these questions by integrating multiple data sources (surveys, HR metrics, performance data, exit interviews) and assessing them against the HSE Management Standards.

The output is different too. Engagement surveys typically produce reports with benchmark comparisons and basic recommendations. Wellbeing audits produce strategic insights about organisational culture, leadership effectiveness, systemic issues, and governance-level recommendations that boards and executive teams can actually act on. The focus isn't just making people happier—it's understanding how wellbeing connects to organisational performance and what governance changes will drive both.

Craig combines FRSPH Fellowship public health expertise with cross-sector board experience—he understands both wellbeing science and business reality. You get recommendations that are evidence-based and commercially realistic.

We work with whatever data you have—the more diverse the data sources, the richer the insights. A comprehensive wellbeing audit typically integrates: survey data (engagement surveys, pulse surveys, cultural assessments, wellbeing questionnaires); HR metrics (turnover rates, absence/sick leave patterns, recruitment success, retention data); performance data (individual and team performance, productivity metrics, project delivery); qualitative data (exit interviews, stay interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses); and organisational data (structure, policies, benefits, programs, recent changes).

The power comes from integration. Looking at one data source gives you a single perspective. Combining multiple sources reveals patterns: high absence in specific teams, performance declining before people leave, wellbeing issues concentrated in particular demographics or departments, cultural problems that surveys miss but exit interviews reveal. cross-source analysis helps surface these connections—human expertise interprets what they mean and what to do about them.

We can also gather new data if needed. If your existing data has gaps or you want deeper insight into specific issues, Craig can design targeted assessments, conduct interviews, or facilitate focus groups. The approach is tailored to what you want to understand and what data you have available.

Data confidentiality is paramount. All data is handled with strict confidentiality protocols. Reports are appropriately anonymized. Craig is bound by professional codes of conduct from both FRSPH and FCMI. Your organisational data stays secure.

AI serves as a pattern recognition tool, not a replacement for human insight. Large language models and machine learning analyse text data (survey comments, exit interviews, focus group transcripts) to identify themes, sentiment patterns, and connections that would take humans months to find manually. AI can process thousands of survey responses, detect subtle language patterns, and surface relationships between different data sources.

Here's what AI does: identifies recurring themes and concerns across qualitative data; detects sentiment shifts over time or across departments; surfaces correlations between different data sources (e.g., teams with low psychological safety also show high turnover); finds outliers and anomalies that warrant deeper investigation; and processes unstructured data at scale to reveal patterns.

But AI doesn't understand organisational context—that's where Craig comes in. He interprets AI-surfaced patterns within your organisational reality, applies public health and wellbeing science to understand root causes, connects findings to business outcomes and strategic priorities, distinguishes genuine issues from statistical noise, and develops governance-level recommendations that are actionable within your context.

The human-AI combination is more powerful than either alone. AI spots patterns humans miss; humans provide context, judgment, and strategic thinking AI lacks. You get the speed and thoroughness of structured analysis with the wisdom and organisational understanding of an FRSPH Fellow who's operated at board level across multiple sectors.

Wellbeing audits work for organisations of all sizes—from 50 employees to 5,000+. The approach scales depending on organisational complexity, data availability, and strategic priorities. What matters isn't size—it's commitment to understanding and improving organisational wellbeing as a strategic priority, not just a "nice to have."

Smaller organisations (50-500 employees) often get highly personalised insights. With fewer people, it's easier to identify specific teams, relationships, and cultural dynamics driving wellbeing patterns. Recommendations can be more targeted and implementation more nimble. The challenge is sometimes limited data—but qualitative methods (interviews, focus groups) can fill gaps.

Medium organisations (500-2,000 employees) typically have rich data and enough complexity for meaningful pattern analysis. Divisions, functions, and locations can be compared. Cultural differences between teams become visible. cross-source analysis is particularly valuable here—spotting trends across multiple teams that would be impossible to see manually.

Large organisations (2,000+ employees) benefit from evidence-based analysis at scale. Pattern recognition across divisions, geographies, and functions reveals systemic issues, cultural variations, and leadership impact. The challenge is data integration—larger organisations often have data silos. Craig works with you to navigate this.

The key question isn't size—it's strategic intent. Are you genuinely interested in understanding organisational wellbeing to inform governance decisions? Or are you looking for a report to satisfy stakeholders? Wellbeing audits deliver value when organisations are ready to act on uncomfortable truths.

You receive a comprehensive report and strategic recommendations—but the real value comes from how you use the insights. The typical post-audit process includes: executive presentation (board or leadership team briefing on findings and strategic recommendations); written report (comprehensive analysis, data visualizations, evidence-based recommendations); stakeholder communication plan (guidance on sharing findings with broader organisation); and implementation roadmap (prioritised actions, governance changes, initiatives).

Implementation is up to you—some organisations take recommendations and run with them internally. Others engage Craig for ongoing advisory support to help navigate implementation, particularly if findings reveal complex cultural or governance challenges. Common post-audit engagements include: leadership coaching for senior team on wellbeing-focused leadership; board advisory on wellbeing governance and oversight; implementation support for cultural change initiatives; and follow-up assessment to measure progress.

The most impactful wellbeing audits lead to governance-level changes: board agenda time dedicated to wellbeing oversight; leadership accountability for wellbeing outcomes; policy and practice changes based on evidence; cultural shifts driven by leadership behaviour change; and resource allocation aligned with wellbeing priorities.

Less impactful audits produce reports that sit on shelves. The difference is leadership commitment. If you're ready to act on what you learn—even if it's uncomfortable—wellbeing audits drive meaningful change. If you're just looking for reassurance or box-ticking, save your money.

Investment depends on organisation size, data complexity, and audit scope. Following an initial consultation, Craig provides a clear proposal outlining approach, timeline, deliverables, and investment. Wellbeing audits are strategic investments—the cost of poor wellbeing (turnover, absence, low productivity, reputational damage) is far higher than the cost of understanding and addressing it.

Typical cost drivers include: organisation size (employee numbers, locations, divisions); data complexity (number of sources, data quality, integration requirements); audit depth (quantitative only, or including qualitative methods like interviews/focus groups); reporting requirements (executive summary, comprehensive report, board presentations); and post-audit support (implementation advisory, stakeholder communication, follow-up measurement).

Return comes from reduced absence, reduced turnover, and reduced organisational risk — reputational, legal and operational. The figure worth quoting is CIPD's: UK employees averaged 9.4 days of sickness absence in the twelve months to 2025, against 5.8 days before the pandemic, with mental ill health the leading cause of long-term absence. What that costs a particular organisation is a question that organisation's own data answers, which is what the audit is for. The percentage returns quoted by wellbeing providers are not repeated here.

Many organisations fund wellbeing audits from: learning and development budgets (executive team development); risk and compliance budgets (duty of care, health and safety); or strategic initiatives budgets (culture change, transformation programs). Some treat it as board advisory expense—which it is, when wellbeing connects to governance and strategic outcomes.

Investment is discussed transparently during the initial consultation, with clear value proposition and expected return.

That's often where the greatest value lies. Wellbeing audits frequently surface issues that surveys miss—cultural dysfunction, leadership blind spots, systemic problems, toxic behaviours, structural inequities. These uncomfortable truths are what's actually driving turnover, absence, and underperformance. If you only wanted good news, you wouldn't need an audit.

Craig presents findings with board-level sensitivity—he understands governance dynamics and stakeholder complexity. Findings are framed around evidence, not blame. The focus is actionable insight, not judgment. He's navigated board-level difficult conversations across NHS, financial services, technology, and manufacturing—presenting uncomfortable truths is part of effective board advisory.

Organisations that embrace difficult truths make the biggest improvements. When boards and leadership teams genuinely want to understand what's happening (not just confirm what they hope is happening), wellbeing audits drive meaningful change. The organisations that get least value are those looking for validation rather than truth.

Common uncomfortable findings include: leadership behaviours undermining stated values; cultural issues concentrated in specific teams or divisions; systemic overwork and unrealistic expectations; wellbeing initiatives not addressing actual needs; policies that sound good but don't work in practice; and governance blind spots around wellbeing oversight.

The question to ask yourself: Are you genuinely ready to hear difficult truths and act on them? Or are you looking for a report that makes everything seem fine? If it's the former, a wellbeing audit delivers enormous value. If it's the latter, skip it.

HR consultants typically focus on programs, policies, and interventions—employee assistance programs, mental health training, wellbeing benefits, engagement initiatives. These are important tactical elements, but they're not strategic. Craig focuses on wellbeing governance: connecting organisational wellbeing to performance, culture, and business outcomes at a level that matters for boards and executive teams.

The difference is perspective and depth. As an FRSPH Fellow, Craig brings public health expertise—understanding wellbeing as a population-level issue requiring systemic intervention, not just individual support. As someone with cross-sector board experience, he understands how wellbeing connects to governance, risk, strategy, and organisational performance. This combination is rare.

HR consultants ask: "What programs should we offer?" Craig asks: "How does organisational wellbeing connect to our strategic priorities? What governance changes would drive systematic improvement? What are we missing in our board-level oversight of wellbeing? How do leadership behaviours influence organisational wellbeing? Where are systemic issues that programs won't fix?"

The output is different too. HR consultancy typically produces recommendations for wellbeing programs and policies. Wellbeing audits produce strategic insights for boards and executive teams: governance-level recommendations, cultural change priorities, leadership development needs, systemic issues requiring structural change, and evidence-based prioritization of initiatives.

You might need both: HR consultancy to implement programs, Craig's wellbeing audit to provide strategic direction and governance oversight. They complement each other—but they're not the same.

Typical timeline is 6-12 weeks from kickoff to final report, depending on organisation size, data complexity, and audit scope. Rushed audits miss important patterns; overly lengthy audits lose momentum. The timeframe balances thoroughness with actionable delivery.

Typical audit phases include: Discovery and scoping (1-2 weeks): understand organisational context, define questions you want answered, identify data sources, agree approach and timeline. Data collection and integration (2-3 weeks): gather existing data (surveys, HR metrics, performance data), conduct any additional data collection (interviews, focus groups if needed), prepare data for analysis. Analysis and interpretation (2-4 weeks): evidence-based pattern recognition across data sources, expert interpretation within organisational context, development of findings and insights, identification of root causes and systemic issues. Recommendations and reporting (1-2 weeks): develop governance-level recommendations, create executive report and visualizations, prepare board/leadership presentation, finalize implementation roadmap.

Timeline flexibility depends on: data availability (ready to analyse vs. needs significant cleaning); organisational complexity (single site vs. multi-location, multi-division); qualitative data collection needs (desk-based analysis vs. requiring interviews/focus groups); and stakeholder engagement requirements (single executive briefing vs. multiple presentations).

The goal is meaningful insight delivered at a pace that allows thorough analysis without losing organisational attention. The initial consultation clarifies expected timeline for your specific situation.