Working on Well-Being

Derek LaCroix, executive director, Lawyers Assistance Program of British Columbia (Canada), explained that well-being embraces the whole person, whereas most of the focus for workplaces has been on wellness.

In his mind, wellness refers to people being in a physical and emotional state which enables them to work effectively, often with the focus being on physical wellness (for example, eating well, having rest, doing exercise, practicing yoga). These are good areas to improve upon, but they’re not the whole story, he said.

“Well-being is the process of moving toward thriving in all areas of one’s life,” Mr. LaCroix explained. “We are all different, and this will mean different things to different people, so there is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to considerations of workplace well-being.”

According to Mr. Artley, the human costs are the biggest risks law firms are facing by not addressing issues of workplace well-being; the damage being caused to mental and physical health cannot be ignored.

“Traditionally, employers may have felt able to ignore issues of employees’ mental health, but many are now waking up to the unsustainability of this approach,” he said. “Other exciting new professions and areas of work are opening up that have far more well-being-focused and flexible ways of working; they are going to lure the best talent away from the law.”

A Practical Response

It is clear that employers need to step up and take responsibility for employee well-being.

“Well-being cannot be viewed as an issue for individuals to have to deal with themselves. It’s part of a broader analysis of workplace environments: how we work, the meaning we get from our work, and how we treat each other when working together,” Mr. Artley said.

According to Ms. Harrell, choosing to ignore employee mental health would be a very bad decision. While the possible harm to individuals is of priority concern, it could also hurt their quality and quantity of work, in turn negatively impacting the employer.

“Employees who are thriving are more productive, more creative, and less prone to mistakes, and they get along better with others,” she suggested. “A thriving workforce will benefit the bottom line; ignoring employee mental health puts the bottom line at risk.”

This approach is supported by the World Health Organization (Switzerland), which acknowledged the link between well-being and mental health years ago in its 2004 report titled “Promoting Mental Health. Concepts, Emerging Evidence, Practice.” The report defined mental health as “a state of well-being in which the individual realizes his or her own abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to his or her community.”

Mr. LaCroix underlined the point, noting that there is a solid business case for supporting workplace well-being, with research showing that people are more efficient and effective when they are feeling whole and inspired.

In his view, new generations of lawyers are increasingly less willing to “work themselves to death”—emotionally or spiritually.

That said, there is no easy solution or magic fix to address concerns about mental health in the workplace, and what works for one organization may not work for another.

Ms. Kepler identified several factors that can impact how organizations tackle well-being in the workplace: the diversity of populations in a firm, cultural attitudes toward stigma and mental health/substance use, workplace culture, and the quality of leadership.

Piggybacking this, Ms. Harrell said: “People and organizations are too varied for a single approach to work. The resources that a huge global firm can offer are very different from what a small firm or government agency can offer. There are different challenges but also different opportunities for different types of organizations.”

She points to the American Bar Association Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs (CoLAP), which launched a campaign in 2018 to advance well-being in the legal profession. Under the program, all types of legal employers, including law firms, law schools, and government entities, for example, pledge to improve lawyer wellness. Another one of its programs is designed to encourage lawyers to proactively address mental health and substance use disorders.

CoLAP collects data on the successes and challenges reported by signatories to see what progress is being made, and it has developed a “Well-Being Toolkit for Lawyers and Legal Employers” to assist workplaces seeking to respond to employees’ needs.

Solving Stigma

A major barrier to identifying and then addressing mental health challenges in the workplace is the stigma and lack of understanding surrounding mental well-being and conditions, such as substance use disorders.

“Stigma is alive and well,” Ms. Harrell said, “and that makes employees reluctant to ask for help or even participate in some well-being or prevention activities.”

One solution is encouraging those in senior positions to talk about their own struggles, to break down some of the barriers, according to Mr. Artley.

He said that the International Bar Association hopes to set up a permanent body of senior practitioners, well-being experts, educators, and regulators from around the world to address this issue.

Mr. LaCroix pointed to the challenge of the entrenched culture that has, over time, been accepted by practitioners, making initiatives related to mental health difficult for those who are well-acquainted with the pressures to conform.

“Law is based upon stare decisis and maintaining the status quo, so lawyers are particularly reluctant to change,” he said.

Generally, lawyers are in the business of trying to minimize uncertainty, he continued, but the sort of cultural changes that are required to improve workplace well-being necessitate the ability to tolerate it.

For Ms. Kepler, tackling stigma starts with education, outreach, and open discussion. She suggested the use of less stigmatizing language. “For example, we would describe someone with bulimia as having an ‘eating disorder,’ but we wouldn’t say that they have a ‘food abuse problem.’ Yet, with substances, we refer to ‘substance abuse’ rather than someone having a ‘substance abuse disorder,’” she said. The lingering belief that addiction is a moral failure rather than an illness is problematic, Ms. Kepler added, noting, “We have more empathy for a diabetic who strays away from their food regime than for the substance user who has relapsed.”

Is it all doom and gloom?

“I do not believe there is any one ‘fix’ or that things will change quickly,” Ms. Harrell predicted, “but I believe that if we work together and persist in our efforts, we will find a variety of solutions that change our legal culture for the better.”

As noted by Ms. Kepler, those in the legal profession are generally good problem solvers with a solid history of success—so who better to address the challenge of workplace well-being?

To hear more about workplace well-being, attend the panel discussion Protecting our Practitioners: Best Practices for Well-Being in the Profession (presented by the Law Firm Committee and the Trademark Administrators Committee) (today, November 15, 3:00 pm–4:00 pm EST).

Moderator: Derek LaCroix QC, executive director, Lawyers Assistance Program of British Columbia (Canada)

Speakers:

• George Artley, BIC project lawyer, International Bar Association (UK)
• Terry L. Harrell, executive director, Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (US)
• Tracy L. Kepler, director of Risk Control Consulting, Global Specialty, Lawyers Professional Responsibility, CNA (US)

Video courtesy of Envato Elements / YanMednis