Beyond image: evaluating the perceived effectiveness of workplace mental health programs in the insurance sector

Abstract

Background

Mental health programs in the workplace have gained increasing attention as organizations strive to support employee well-being. However, the effectiveness and reception of these initiatives from the employee perspective still need to be studied.

Methods

A qualitative study used 30 semi-structured interviews with individuals from large insurance companies in Portugal. It focused on their perceptions of workplace mental health programs, stress, and time management training. The participants ranged in age from 25 to 55 years (average 38), with a slightly more significant proportion of women, reflecting the gender distribution in the Portuguese insurance sector. The sample had an average of 10 years of industry experience, from entry-level to middle-management roles. Thematic analysis with an audit trail and thick description was used to analyse data.

Results

The findings revealed a significant disconnect between the intended benefits of these programs and employee experiences. Many viewed the initiatives as primarily beneficial for the company’s image rather than employee well-being. A common concern was that workload remained unchanged after training, leading employees to prioritize work over program participation. Additional key findings included generational differences in program perception, with younger employees expressing more frustration over the lack of follow-through. Most participants reported that initiatives failed to address the root causes of stress. More than half of the interviewees felt a lingering stigma around discussing mental health at work, whereas a majority mentioned increased stress due to rapid industry digitalization. Notably, many participants perceived a significant gap between upper management’s promotion of mental health initiatives and their understanding of daily employee challenges.

Conclusions

These findings highlight a critical gap between implementing workplace mental health programs and their perceived value among employees. Organizations need to reevaluate their mental health initiatives to ensure that they provide tangible benefits and address underlying workplace stressors. Future research should explore strategies to better align mental health programs with the insurance sector’s employee needs and work realities.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-025-21302-9.

Introduction

In recent years, the importance of workplace mental health has gained significant recognition globally. Mental health issues affect individual well-being but substantially affect organizational productivity, employee retention, and overall workplace dynamics. The World Health Organization1 estimates that depression and anxiety disorders cost the global economy US$ 1 trillion each year in lost productivity, highlighting the economic imperative of addressing mental health in the workplace.

In response to this growing awareness, there has been a notable trend among companies2 to implement mental health programs and initiatives. These programs often include stress management training, employee assistance programs, mindfulness sessions, and other wellness activities to support employee mental health. The insurance sector, known for its high-stress environment and demanding workloads, has been particularly active in adopting such initiatives.

However, despite the proliferation of these programs, there remains a significant gap in the literature regarding their effectiveness from the employee perspective. While numerous studies have examined the potential benefits of workplace mental health initiatives, few have delved into how employees perceive and experience these programs. This gap is particularly pronounced in the context of specific industries such as insurance, where the nature of work presents unique mental health challenges due to high-pressure environments, emotional toll from handling claims, ethical dilemmas, regulatory compliance stress, and customer frustrations, amongst others.

The disconnect between the intended benefits of mental health programs and their actual impact on employees raises important questions about the efficacy of current approaches. Are these initiatives genuinely addressing the root causes of workplace stress and mental health issues? How do employees view these programs about their daily work experiences and challenges?

This study addresses these questions by exploring employees’ perceptions of workplace mental health programs in large insurance companies in Portugal. Specifically, our research objectives are (i) to examine how employees in the insurance sector perceive and experience workplace mental health initiatives, (ii) to identify potential disconnects between the intended benefits of these programs and their actual impact on employee well-being, and (iii) to understand how industry-specific challenges in the insurance sector interact with mental health initiatives. By focusing on employee perspectives, this study seeks to provide valuable insights that can inform the development of more effective and employee-centred mental health strategies in the workplace, particularly within the insurance industry.

Literature review

Workplace mental health

Workplace mental health encompasses employees’ psychological, emotional, and social well-being and is critical for fostering a productive work environment [1]. Key concepts in workplace mental health include psychological safety, stress management, and work-life balance [2].

In response to growing awareness, companies are increasingly implementing mental health initiatives. A survey by the Business Group on Health [3] revealed that 88% of large employers offered mental health coverage in their most popular health plan. These initiatives range from employee assistance programs (EAPs) to mindfulness sessions and stress management training. However, the effectiveness of these programs often needs to be measured, with Deloitte [4] reporting that only 30% of employers meaningfully measure the impact of their well-being programs.

Theoretical frameworks

Theories such as the job demands-resources (JD-R) model [5] and the conservation of resources (COR) theory [6] provide frameworks for understanding how workplace factors influence employee mental health.

Job demands-resources (JD-R) model

The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [5] is a vital framework for understanding the interplay between workplace factors and employee mental health. According to this model, job demands – such as high workloads and emotional strain – can lead to adverse outcomes like burnout. Job resources – such as social support and autonomy – can mitigate these effects and enhance employee engagement. This dual process highlights how balancing demands and resources is essential for maintaining mental well-being in the workplace [7].

Research supports the JD-R model across various settings, including high-stress industries like insurance. For instance, studies have shown that excessive emotional demands can lead to emotional exhaustion when not countered by adequate resources. The model’s flexibility allows it to adapt to different work contexts, making it particularly relevant for designing interventions to improve employee mental health. Organizations can foster a healthier work environment by enhancing job resources while managing demands [8].

Furthermore, the JD-R model emphasizes two key psychological processes: health impairment and motivation. The former described how high job demands can exhaust employees’ resources and lead to burnout, while the latter suggests that job resources can motivate employees to improve their performance [9]. This framework not only aids in identifying risk factors for mental health issues but also informs the development of effective workplace interventions tailored to specific organizational needs.

Conservation of resources (COR) theory

The Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, developed by Hobfoll [6], provides a framework for understanding how individuals manage stress and engage with mental health initiatives in the workplace. This theory posits that people are motivated to obtain, retain, and protect resources they value, including objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies [10]. In workplace mental health, these resources might include job security, social support, self-esteem, or work-life balance [6].

According to COR theory, stress occurs when there is a threat of resource loss, actual resource loss, or lack of resource gain following resource investment. In the insurance sector, for example, employees might experience stress due to the threat of job loss during market volatility, the actual loss of work-life balance due to high workloads, or the lack of career advancement despite investing time and effort in their work [11]. This perspective helps explain why specific workplace stressors can significantly impact employee mental health and well-being.

The COR theory also suggests that individuals with more resources are better positioned to gain additional resources, while those with fewer resources are more vulnerable to resource loss. This principle has important implications for workplace mental health initiatives. Employees with strong support systems or high levels of resilience may be more likely to engage with and benefit from mental health programs. Conversely, those already experiencing resource depletion may struggle to participate in such initiatives, highlighting the need for targeted and accessible interventions considering individual circumstances and resource levels [12].

Evolution of workplace mental health initiatives

The focus of workplace mental health initiatives has evolved. Initially, interventions were primarily reactive, focusing on treatment and support for employees already experiencing mental health issues. However, there has been a shift toward more proactive and preventative approaches. LaMontagne and colleagues [13] proposed an integrated approach to workplace mental health, which included (i) preventing harm (primary prevention), (ii) promoting the positive aspects of work and worker strengths, and (iii) addressing mental health problems regardless of cause. This integrated approach recognized that workplace factors can both contribute to and protect against mental health problems and that interventions should target both organizational and individual levels.

Impact of COVID-19 on workplace mental health

The COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated the focus on workplace mental health, with many organizations rapidly adapting to remote work and implementing new support measures. A study by McKinsey [14] revealed that 96% of companies globally provided additional mental health resources to employees during the pandemic, highlighting the growing recognition of mental health as a critical workplace issue.

Challenges in workplace mental health programs

Despite these advancements, significant challenges remain. Stigma continues to be a major barrier to accessing mental health support in the workplace [15]. Additionally, there is often a disconnect between the availability of mental health resources and employees’ awareness or willingness to use them [16].

As the field of workplace mental health continues to evolve, there is a growing emphasis on creating psychologically safe work environments, addressing systemic issues that contribute to poor mental health, and developing more personalized and culturally sensitive approaches to mental health support [17].

Research on employee perceptions of mental health initiatives reveals varied awareness and utilization of workplace resources. Dimoff and Kelloway [16] reported that only 46% of employees were aware of workplace mental health resources, with this figure rising to 66% among those who had experienced mental health symptoms, suggesting that personal experience may increase awareness. However, this still indicates a significant gap in employer communication and outreach.

Awareness alone does not guarantee utilization. Attridge [18] reported that even when employees are aware of mental health programs, utilization rates often remain low, ranging from 3 to 5% of the workforce annually. This underutilization can be attributed to various factors, including stigma, lack of perceived need, and concerns about confidentiality.

Stigma remains a significant barrier to engagement with mental health initiatives. A meta-analysis by Hanisch et al. [15] revealed that workplace stigma not only affects help-seeking behaviours but also impacts the disclosure of mental health issues to employers. This stigma can be particularly pronounced in high-pressure industries such as insurance, where employees may fear that seeking help could be perceived as a sign of weakness or inability to handle job demands.

Organizational factors also influence employee perceptions of mental health initiatives. Grawitch et al. [19] reported that employees’ trust in their organization and perceived organizational support significantly predict their attitudes toward and engagement with wellness programs. Employees who believe these initiatives aim to improve their well-being rather than merely serve organizational interests are likelier to participate.

The alignment of mental health initiatives with employee needs is another crucial factor. Csiernik [20] argued that many workplace mental health programs fail to adequately address the root causes of stress and mental health issues, such as high workloads, poor work-life balance, and organizational culture problems. This misalignment can lead to scepticism among employees about the effectiveness and sincerity of these programs.

Effectiveness of mental health initiatives

Evaluating the effectiveness of mental health initiatives remains a challenge. Metrics often used include employee engagement scores, absenteeism rates, and self-reported well-being measures [21]. However, these metrics may not capture the full impact of mental health programs on employee experiences and organizational outcomes.

Some companies have reported positive outcomes from their mental health initiatives, such as reducing operational healthcare costs after implementing their comprehensive mental health strategy [22]. Similarly, a study by Deloitte [4] revealed that for every £1 spent on mental health interventions, employers get £5 back in reduced presenteeism, absenteeism, and staff turnover.

However, rigorous, long-term studies on the effectiveness of these programs still need to be completed, particularly in specific industries such as insurance. Joyce et al. [23] systematically reviewed workplace mental health interventions. They reported that while there is some evidence for the effectiveness of specific approaches (such as cognitive-behavioural therapy-based stress management), the quality of evidence is low-moderate.

A global study by Qualtrics [24] revealed that respondents reported a decline in mental health since the COVID-19 outbreak began, which has resulted in increased demands for mental health support. In response, many organizations rapidly expanded their offerings. However, the effectiveness of these hastily implemented programs remains to be determined.

There is also growing recognition of the need for more personalized approaches to workplace mental health. One-size-fits-all programs may need to address the diverse needs of employees adequately. Stratton et al. [25] argue for a more tailored approach considering individual differences, job roles, and specific workplace stressors.

Finally, the role of leadership in shaping employees’ perceptions of mental health initiatives cannot be overstated. Gayed et al. [26] reported that employee engagement and program effectiveness increase significantly when leaders actively support and participate in mental health initiatives.

The insurance sector is characterized by several distinctive stressors that can impact employee mental health. First, high workloads and time pressure are prevalent, as insurance professionals often face intense demands, particularly during peak claim periods or policy renewal seasons. Giorgi et al. [27] reported that this constant pressure can lead to chronic stress and burnout. Second, emotional labour is a significant concern, as insurance workers frequently deal with clients experiencing distress or loss. Grandey and Melloy [28] highlighted how this emotional labour could lead to emotional exhaustion and decreased job satisfaction over time.

Additionally, the highly regulated nature of the insurance industry adds another layer of stress. There is a constant need to stay updated with changing regulations and ensure that compliance can be a significant source of anxiety for insurance professionals. Rapid industry digitalization has also been identified as a source of stress for employees, particularly those who struggle to adapt to new technologies or fear job obsolescence [29]. Furthermore, using stringent performance metrics and sales targets can create a high-pressure environment that negatively impacts mental health [30]. Finally, market volatility can create job insecurity and stress among employees, as the insurance industry is subject to fluctuations and economic uncertainties [31].

Despite implementing mental health programs in many insurance companies, there often exists a significant gap between the intended benefits of these initiatives and employees’ experience. This disconnect can be attributed to several factors. One major issue is the misalignment with root causes of stress. Memish et al. [1] argued that many workplace mental health programs fail to address the underlying organizational and systemic issues that contribute to poor mental health. In the insurance context, this might mean implementing stress management training without addressing unrealistic workloads or performance targets.

Another contributing factor is the lack of integrating mental health initiatives into the organizational structure and culture. LaMontagne et al. [13] emphasized integrating mental health initiatives into the organizational framework. However, many programs in the insurance sector still need to be siloed, limiting their effectiveness [32]. Additionally, employees may view mental health initiatives sceptically, particularly if they perceive them as primarily serving the company’s interests rather than genuinely supporting employee well-being. This scepticism can be exacerbated in high-pressure environments such as insurance [19].

Inadequate follow-through on mental health initiatives is another significant issue. Memish et al. [1] noted that many workplace mental health programs lack sustained implementation and follow-through. Initial enthusiasm may wane over time, leading to decreased engagement and effectiveness. Cultural and contextual factors also play a role in shaping employee perceptions. In the insurance sector, where resilience and the ability to handle pressure are often prized, there may be cultural barriers to seeking or admitting vulnerability [15].

A common complaint among employees is that while mental health training is provided, workloads remain unchanged. As a result, many employees perceive the training as an additional burden rather than a genuine attempt to improve well-being [33].

Several theoretical frameworks can help explain the disconnect between program intentions and employee experiences. The theory of planned behaviour [34] suggests that intentions to engage in health behaviours are influenced by attitudes, subject norms, and perceived behavioural control. In the context of workplace mental health programs, this theory can explain why employees might not engage with available resources despite recognizing their potential benefits. The job demands-resources model [5] posits that job demands can lead to strain and burnout, whereas job resources can buffer these effects. This model explains why mental health initiatives that fail to address fundamental job demands in the insurance industry may be ineffective. Finally, Organizational Justice Theory [35] emphasizes the importance of fairness in organizational processes. Perceptions of unfairness in implementation or access to mental health resources can undermine their effectiveness.

Addressing the disconnect between intentions and experiences in workplace mental health initiatives within the insurance industry requires a multifaceted approach [36]. The development of mental health programs that specifically address the unique stressors of the insurance industry is essential rather than relying on generic approaches. Participatory design, which involves employees in designing and implementing mental health initiatives, can ensure that these programs meet actual needs and address real concerns [37]. Implementing robust evaluation methods can extend beyond simple utilization metrics to assess the true impact of mental health programs on employee well-being, and organizational outcomes are also crucial.

Moreover, ensuring that leaders in the insurance industry support and actively participate in mental health initiatives can model healthy behaviours and create a culture of openness [26]. Finally, recognizing that adequate mental health support may require fundamental changes to work processes, performance metrics, and the organizational culture within the insurance industry is vital.

Methods

Research design

This study employed a qualitative research design, utilizing semi-structured interviews to explore employees’ perceptions of workplace mental health programs in large insurance companies in Portugal. The qualitative approach was chosen to explore employees’ experiences, attitudes, and beliefs regarding mental health initiatives in their workplace [38].

This study adopted an interpretative phenomenological approach rooted in the constructivist paradigm [39]. This epistemological stance acknowledges that individuals construct meaning through their lived experiences and interactions with their environment. By employing this approach, we aimed to understand employees’ subjective experiences and perceptions of employees regarding workplace mental health programs in the insurance sector [40].

Participants and sampling

The study sample comprised 30 employees from large, reputable insurance companies in Portugal. The participants were selected via purposive sampling to ensure diverse representations across age, gender, and job roles within the sector [41]. The inclusion criteria were (i) current employment at an insurance company, (ii) a minimum of one year of work experience in the company, and (iii) familiarity with the company’s mental health initiatives.

The final sample included employees aged 25–55, with an average age of 38. The gender distribution slightly favoured women, reflecting the general gender distribution in the Portuguese insurance sector. The participants’ roles span from entry-level to middle management positions, with an average industry experience of 10 years.

Data collection

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted between March and May 2024. Each interview lasted approximately 60–90 min and was directed in Portuguese. The interviews were audio-recorded with participant consent and later transcribed verbatim.

The interviews were conducted online via secure video conferencing platforms. This format was chosen for its practicality and convenience, allowing participants to engage without the constraints of travel or scheduling conflicts. It facilitated flexibility while maintaining the personal interaction necessary for in-depth qualitative interviews [42].

The interview guide was developed based on a comprehensive literature review and in consultation with experts in occupational health psychology. It covered the following key areas: (i) awareness and understanding of workplace mental health programs; (ii) personal experiences with these programs; (iii) perceived effectiveness of the initiatives; (iv) barriers to engagement with mental health resources; and (v) suggestions for improvement.

Before the main study, the interview guide was piloted with three employees from different insurance companies to ensure the clarity and relevance of the questions.

As the interviews were conducted in Portuguese, a rigorous translation process was implemented to ensure the accuracy and cultural relevance of the data. The interview transcripts were first translated from Portuguese to English independently by both authors, fluent in both languages and familiar with the insurance industry terminology. The authors then compared their translations and discussed differences to reach a consensus. A back translation process was employed further to ensure the quality and accuracy of the translation. The authors translated the English version back to Portuguese. The research team discussed and resolved any discrepancies between the original and back-translated versions. This process helped maintain the integrity of the participants’ original meaning and nuances in their responses [43].

Data analysis

The interview transcripts were analysed via thematic analysis, following the six-step process outlined by Braun and Clarke [44]: (i) familiarization with the data, (ii) generating initial codes, (iii) searching for themes, (iv) reviewing themes; (v) defining and naming themes, and (vi) producing the report.

The two researchers independently coded the data to enhance reliability. Any discrepancies in coding were discussed and resolved through consensus. The software NVivo 12 was used to assist in the organization and analysis of the qualitative data.

Several strategies were employed to increase the study’s trustworthiness, following the guidelines established by Lincoln and Guba [45] to ensure rigor in qualitative research. First, member checking was utilized as a crucial technique to establish credibility. After the initial analysis, the interview summaries were shared with the participants to ensure accurate representation of their views. This process allowed participants to review, clarify, or expand their responses, thereby validating the researchers’ interpretations and enhancing their authenticity.

Second, peer debriefing was conducted throughout the research process. Regular discussions were held among the research team to challenge assumptions, explore alternative interpretations of the data, and mitigate potential researcher bias. These sessions provided opportunities for critical reflection on emerging themes and analytical decisions.

An audit trail was meticulously maintained throughout the study to ensure dependability and confirmability. This audit trail included detailed records of the research process, encompassing methodological decisions, data collection procedures, and analytical steps. The audit trail is a transparent account of the research journey, allowing for external scrutiny and replication of the study if needed.

Finally, a thick description was employed to present the findings to enhance transferability. Rich, detailed descriptions of the context, participants, and emergent themes were provided. This approach allows readers to assess the applicability of the findings to other contexts, recognizing the Portuguese insurance industry’s unique characteristics while identifying potential commonalities with other workplace settings. By offering comprehensive contextual information, other researchers and practitioners can make informed judgments about the relevance of the findings to their specific situations.

The complete interview schedule in Portuguese and English is provided in the Appendix. Providing this schedule allows for transparency in research processes and enables other researchers to understand specific questions asked during interviews.

Results and discussion

Analysis of the interview data unveiled three primary themes concerning employee perceptions of workplace mental health programs: (i) scepticism about program authenticity, (ii) concerns over time investment, and (iii) doubts about program effectiveness. These findings provide valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities of implementing mental health initiatives in organizational settings.

Theme 1 – perception of mental health programs as image-focused (program authenticity)

A prominent theme that emerged was employees’ scepticism about the true intentions behind company mental health programs. Many interviewees viewed these initiatives as primarily serving public relations purposes rather than genuinely supporting employee well-being. This perception of inauthenticity was widespread among participants, as illustrated by the following quotes:

“It appears to be they are just ticking a box to look good to the public and potential hires. I am not sure how much they care about our well-being.” (Line 28).

“These programs feel more like a PR stunt than a real effort to help us. It is all about the company’s image.” (Line 32).

The participants frequently noted discrepancies between the stated goals of mental health programs and their day-to-day work experiences. This disconnect was evident in statements such as:

“They tell us to prioritize our mental health, but then pile on unrealistic deadlines and expectations. It feels contradictory”. (Line 35)

“We are encouraged to attend stress management workshops, but our workloads never decrease. It is like they are giving us tools to handle an impossible situation rather than addressing the root cause.” (Line 39).

While the majority of participants expressed scepticism, some acknowledged the potential benefits of the programs:

“I appreciate that they are at least trying to address mental health. Even if it is not perfect, it is a step in the right direction.” (Line 52).

This perception of inauthenticity aligns with research showing that the effectiveness of workplace mental health programs can be undermined when employees perceive them as superficial or disconnected from organizational realities [16, 18]. The disconnect noted by participants between program goals and workplace practices echoes findings emphasizing the importance of organizational culture and authentic leadership in supporting employee well-being [46].

The scepticism participants express can be understood through the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, which posits that high job demands without corresponding resources can lead to burnout and disengagement. When employees perceive mental health initiatives as mere ‘box-ticking’ exercises, it diminishes their sense of support from the organization and may exacerbate feelings of stress and disillusionment [47].

Addressing perceptions of inauthenticity is crucial for organizations aiming to foster a supportive environment for mental health initiatives. Organizations can enhance employee engagement with mental health resources by aligning program goals with authentic workplace leadership and improving overall well-being [48].

Theme 2 – time investment concerns

The participants consistently raised concerns about the time required to engage with mental health programs, particularly about existing workloads. Many employees noted that while they were encouraged to attend mental health training sessions, their work responsibilities were not reduced to accommodate this time investment. The following quotes illustrate this sentiment:

“After spending two hours in a workshop, I return to a full inbox and looming deadlines. It increases my stress”. (Line 55).

“These programs are great in theory, but they do not account for our already packed schedules. It feels like another task on top of everything else.” (Line 59).

Several interviewees expressed a preference for using available time to complete work tasks rather than attending mental health programs:

“Given the choice between finishing a project or going to another seminar on stress management, I will choose the project every time. It is what I am evaluated on”. (Line 63).

“I appreciate the intention, but when I am drowning in work, attending a wellness session is the last thing on my mind.” (Line 67).

However, some participants recognized the potential long-term benefits of these benefits:

“It is a dilemma. We need these programs to manage stress, but finding time for them is stressful in itself. Maybe if they were shorter or more flexible, it would be easier.” (Line 81).

The time-related concerns raised by participants reflect a common challenge in implementing workplace health interventions. Previous research has identified time constraints as a significant barrier to employee participation in workplace health promotion programs [18]. Our findings extend this understanding by revealing how time pressures can lead employees to view mental health programs as additional stressors rather than supportive resources.

The preference expressed by participants for work tasks over mental health training aligns with studies showing that healthcare workers often prioritize immediate job responsibilities over health promotion activities [49]. This suggests a need for organizations to more carefully consider how mental health initiatives are integrated into existing work structures and expectations. Effective interventions may need to be embedded within daily work routines rather than added as separate activities that compete for employees’ limited time [50].

Theme 3 – program effectiveness

Employees had mixed perceptions regarding the effectiveness of workplace mental health programs, particularly concerning their long-term impact. While some participants reported immediate benefits from mental health initiatives, many questioned their lasting effects:

“The workshops can be uplifting at the moment, but a week later, it is business as usual. I am unsure how much changes in the long run”. (Line 106)

“I feel better right after a session, but the effect does not last when I am back in the thick of work stress.” (Line 80).

However, some participants did note positive outcomes:

“The mindfulness techniques I learned have been helpful. I use them regularly when I feel overwhelmed.” (Line 94).

The participants offered numerous suggestions for improving program effectiveness:

“If they truly want to make a difference, they need to look at the whole work environment, not just offer occasional training.” (Line 120).

“We need more personalized support. What works for one person might not work for another.” (Line 93).

“Regular check-ins and follow-ups would be helpful. We feel left alone after the initial program”. (Line 90).

The mixed perceptions regarding program effectiveness, particularly concerning long-term impact, align with current evidence on workplace mental health interventions. Studies have shown that while such programs can have positive effects, they are often modest and short-lived [51, 52]. Our participants’ experiences reflect this broader trend, highlighting the challenges of creating sustained improvements in workplace mental health.

The suggestions offered by participants for improving program effectiveness, such as more individualized approaches and greater integration into daily work practices, are supported by emerging research on workplace mental health. Studies have shown that integrated approaches that address individual and organizational factors are most effective at promoting workplace mental health [13]. Our participants’ desire for ongoing support and follow-up aligns with recommendations in the literature for more comprehensive, sustained approaches to mental health support rather than isolated interventions [18].

In light of the JD-R model, which posits that job demands can lead to strain and burnout. In contrast, job resources can buffer these effects [5, 46]; it becomes clear that organizations must enhance job resources while managing job demands to foster effective mental health programs. The JD-R model’s dual processes – the health impairment and the motivational processes – highlight that high job demands can exhaust employees’ resources and lead to burnout. In contrast, adequate resources can motivate employees to improve their performance.

Furthermore, the COR theory emphasizes that individuals strive to conserve their resources and may resist engaging in activities perceived as additional burdens [6]. Participant’s perceptions that mental health programs add to their workload rather than alleviate stress underscore this theory’s relevance.

In summary, this study highlights significant challenges associated with workplace mental health programs, including perceptions of inauthenticity, time investment concerns, and questions about program effectiveness. Employees’ scepticism about the true intentions behind these initiatives underscores the need for organizations to foster a culture of authenticity and genuine commitment to employee well-being. Furthermore, the findings suggest that integrating mental health support into daily work practices is crucial for overcoming time-related barriers and enhancing program engagement.

However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this study. The qualitative nature of the research, while providing rich, in-depth insights, limits the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. Although appropriate for qualitative research, the sample size may only capture part of the full range of employee experiences across different industries or organizational contexts. Additionally, the study relied on self-reported data, which can be subject to recall bias and social desirability effects. Furthermore, the study’s cross-sectional design does not allow for examining how perceptions might change over time or in response to program modifications.

Despite these limitations, this study provides valuable insights into employees’ perceptions of workplace mental health programs. These findings call for a paradigm shift in how organizations approach workplace mental health. By prioritizing holistic, sustained strategies that align with employee needs and organizational realities, companies can create more supportive environments that promote mental well-being and enhance overall productivity and job satisfaction.

Conclusions

This study provides valuable insights into employees’ perceptions of workplace mental health programs, highlighting significant challenges and opportunities for improvement. Our findings reveal three themes: scepticism about the authenticity of mental health initiatives, concerns about time investment, and mixed perceptions of program effectiveness. These insights have important implications for designing and implementing workplace mental health strategies.

The scepticism expressed by employees regarding the true intentions behind mental health programs underscores the critical importance of authenticity in organizational efforts to support employee well-being. Our findings suggest that there is often a perceived disconnect between the stated goals of mental health initiatives and the realities of the work environment. This highlights the need for organizations to align their mental health programs with broader organizational practices and culture to demonstrate a genuine commitment to employee well-being.

Time investment concerns emerged as a significant barrier to the effectiveness of mental health programs. The participants consistently reported that attending mental health initiatives often conflicts with their work responsibilities, potentially adding to their stress rather than alleviating it. This finding emphasizes integrating mental health support into daily work routines rather than treating it as a separate, additional task.

The mixed perceptions of program effectiveness, particularly regarding long-term impact, suggest that current approaches to workplace mental health may be insufficient. Employees expressed a desire for more individualized, ongoing support embedded within the work environment. This indicates a need for organizations to move beyond one-off workshops or training sessions toward more comprehensive, sustained approaches to mental health support.

Despite these challenges, the study also reveals opportunities for improvement. Employees’ suggestions for more individualized approaches, better integration of mental health considerations into work practices, and increased follow-up support provide valuable insights for enhancing program effectiveness. These findings call for a paradigm shift in how organizations approach workplace mental health, emphasizing holistic, sustained strategies that align with employee needs and organizational realities.

Future research should employ longitudinal designs to examine how employee perceptions of mental health programs change over time and in response to program modifications, including exploring the effectiveness of mental health initiatives fully integrated into daily work practices rather than standalone programs.

Authors' contributions

I.B. conceptualized and designed the study, developed the methodology and conducted the literature review. I.B. was responsible for data collection, including conducting interviews and transcription. I.B. performed the initial data analysis and interpretation, and wrote the original draft of the manuscript. E.R. provided supervision and mentorship throughout the research process. E.R. validated the methodology, contributed to the development of the theoretical framework, and provided critical insights for data interpretation. E.R. substantively revised and edited the manuscript, enhancing its intellectual content. Both I.B. and E.R. collaboratively refined the data analysis, discussed the results, and formulated the conclusions. Both authors jointly reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. I.B. and E.R. both contributed to project administration and were involved in responding to reviewers’ comments and making necessary revisions. Both authors agree to be personally accountable for their own contributions and ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and documented in the literature.

Funding

This work was supported by the UIBD/05105/2020 Program Contract, funded by national funds through the FCT I.P.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The data are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions, as they contain information that could compromise research participant privacy/consent.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The Internal Review Board of Portucalense University reviewed and approved the study protocol. The board determined the study’s compliance with ethical standards, given the non-sensitive nature of the information collected and the carefully constructed interview guide. All participants provided informed written consent prior to their involvement in the study. The research was conducted in full accordance with the ethical research practices of REMIT and adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, ensuring the protection of participants’ rights and well-being throughout the study.

Consent for publication

Not Applicable – This manuscript contains no person’s data.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.