In a groundbreaking study emerging from Simon Fraser University, researchers overturn a long-standing assumption about mental health disclosures in the workplace—challenging the notion that organizations hold little sway over whether employees reveal mental health struggles. Contrary to prevailing beliefs, this new evidence suggests that organizations play a pivotal role in shaping an environment conducive to open disclosure, a finding with profound implications for workplace culture and productivity.
Mental health issues are more pervasive in professional settings than many realize. The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 15% of adults globally grapple with some form of mental health concern. Parallel to this, surveys in various corporate contexts reveal that as many as 65% of employees feel their mental health challenges directly disrupt their job performance. Despite these sobering statistics, many organizations continue to regard the decision to disclose mental health conditions as an entirely personal matter—shielded from corporate influence.
Zhanna Lyubykh, an assistant professor at the Beedie School of Business and lead author of the study recently published in Human Resource Management, directly challenges this entrenched perspective. “Our data provide compelling evidence that organizational factors critically influence disclosure decisions,” she explains. “What employees perceive about how their disclosures will be treated is not a trivial detail—it falls squarely within an organization’s control to shape.” This insight invites a reconsideration of corporate mental health policies that traditionally emphasize individual choice without addressing the structural context.
The study’s results are striking: employees who view their workplace as supportive are 55% more likely to disclose mental health issues to their employer. Yet, organizational support transcends the simplistic absence of stigma or discrimination. According to Lyubykh, it embodies a holistic feeling of genuine backing—where employees believe that not only will they be accepted, but that accessing mental health resources and accommodations will tangibly improve their well-being and workplace experience.
Crucially, the research highlights the subtle but profound impact of social supports embedded in the workplace’s environmental fabric. These aren’t formal programs or policies per se, but nuanced signals—the “social cues” that employees absorb consciously or subconsciously. For instance, witnessing a colleague who disclosed a mental health challenge suffering professional setbacks or perceiving the bureaucratic complexities in accessing support can signal to others that disclosure carries risk rather than relief.
Lyubykh underscores how these social supports manifest: “People take note of everyday realities. They watch whether colleagues who disclose are passed over for promotions, listen to the tone and frequency of conversations about mental health among peers, and observe how efficiently and beneficially support services are delivered.” When organizational actions align with supportive rhetoric, it fosters an atmosphere where disclosure feels safe and valued. This phenomenon eloquently exemplifies the principle that actions indeed speak louder than policies or slogans.
The researchers undertook a dual-survey methodology to unpack the complex relationship between disclosure, organizational climate, and employee outcomes. The first survey differentiated between willingness to disclose and actual disclosure actions, identifying key influencers on employees’ decision-making processes. The second survey explored links between organizational mental health support and work-related absenteeism, unearthing tangible costs and benefits linked to workplace climate.
Results from these comprehensive surveys reveal a troubling correlation between low disclosure rates combined with negative perceptions and heightened absenteeism, increased anxiety, diminished productivity, and overall poor performance. Notably, these adverse outcomes do not merely affect individual employees but ripple through entire organizations. Conversely, workplaces perceived as supportive of mental health generate positive outcomes across multiple dimensions—from reducing absenteeism to improving morale and retention.
The economic and operational implications of these findings are clear and compelling. High-performing employees are unlikely to remain in work environments that fail to recognize or support their mental health needs. As Lyubykh warns, “When organizations neglect to foster a supportive environment, they risk losing top talent to attrition, compounding the human and financial costs of unresolved mental health issues.” This linkage forces employers to reevaluate their strategies, recognizing that a supportive environment is not just a moral imperative but a definitive competitive advantage.
At the core of enabling change is leadership. Lyubykh advocates for organizations to expand existing workplace surveys to include explicit questions about comfort levels in discussing mental health concerns. Instituting such measures provides a vital benchmark, offering data-driven insights to track shifts in employee perceptions over time. These metrics empower leadership to tailor interventions effectively and monitor their impact, fostering a cycle of continuous improvement.
Leadership’s responsibility extends beyond measurement to cultivating authentic organizational cultures where mental health topics are normalized, respected, and supported. This requires dismantling stigmatizing traditions, streamlining access to mental health resources, and, importantly, ensuring that disclosures lead to meaningful accommodations rather than punitive outcomes. In doing so, organizations do not merely mitigate risk—they actively enhance employee engagement, loyalty, and overall organizational health.
This pioneering study signals a paradigm shift in how mental health disclosure is understood within professional environments. It underscores that organizational influence is neither negligible nor indirect but critically forms the backdrop against which disclosure decisions unfold. By recognizing and embracing their role, employers can enact substantive change—improving individual well-being, optimizing performance, and reinforcing their social and economic resilience in an increasingly complex workplace landscape.
As mental health continues to emerge from the shadows within corporate dialogue, this research offers a strategic blueprint rooted in empirical evidence. It affirms that transparency and support around mental health are attainable goals, intrinsically linked to organizational success. Moving forward, companies that heed this insight will not only foster healthier work environments but will carve out sustainable advantages in talent management and operational efficacy.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Facilitating Mental Health Disclosure and Better Work Outcomes: The Role of Organizational Support for Disclosing Mental Health Concerns
News Publication Date: 21-Apr-2025
Web References: 10.1002/hrm.22310
References: Study published in Human Resource Management journal
Keywords: Mental Health Disclosure, Organizational Support, Employee Well-being, Workplace Culture, Stigma Reduction, Mental Health Policies, Absenteeism, Productivity, Employee Retention, Leadership, Survey Research
