Employee Assistance Programs: Balancing Increased Productivity and Engagement Among Employees with Equal Employment and Legal Complience.

• Author: Smith, Robert A.

INTRODUCTION

Cognitive health issues, drug addiction, difficulties experienced in their relationships outside of work, and difficulties in their relationships with co-workers, negatively impacts employee productivity. In fact, 1 in 3 adults worldwide is estimated to develop a behavioral health disorder, including drug or alcohol abuse, over their lifetime and studies have shown that poor job quality can be one of the triggers for behavioral health disorders (Attridge, 2019). Recognizing this, companies have been utilizing forms of personal assistance ranging from personal counseling to social betterment initiatives for over 100 years (Hartwell, Steele, French. Potter, Rodman, & Zarkin, 1996). An increasingly more prevalent type of personal assistance programs falls under the umbrella of Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs), which are intended to assist employees with acute, but mutable behavioral issues and refer those with more severe or longer-term issues for further treatment (Attridge, 2019). One of the most significant benefits of EAPs is their role as intervention programs that reduce organizational costs by directly addressing the reasons for reduced productivity (Bophela & Govender, 2015).

There is a positive correlation between higher usage of Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) and workplace productivity and job satisfaction (Sharar & DeLapp, 2017). Increased utilization is also linked to lowered rates of absenteeism and presenteeism (Sharar & DeLapp, 2017). Employees who experience presenteeism are physically present at work but lacking in productivity, as they are working while they are impaired physically or emotionally (Johns, 2010). EAPs are administered in a variety of ways and can vary widely by organizational size and industry, and they can be managed either administratively within the human resources, medical, or other departments through either internal administration or external contractors based upon the preferences, budgeting, and resources of the organization (Hartwell et al., 1996). Approximately 97 percent of employers with 5 thousand or more employees offer EAP services in the United States alone, with roughly 75 percent of employers with between 1 and 5 thousand employees providing EAP services, and as of 2016, around 77 percent of all employers provided their employees with EAP services (Handrick, 2018; Heathfield, 2017). The presence of EAPs within organizations has also been linked to increased ability to offer, recruit, improve, and retain more employees than organizations without EAPs and proactive employees experience exponential increases in positive workplace outcomes (Bophela & Govender, 2015).

Despite the prevalence and guarantees of confidentiality associated with usage of the benefits, utilization rates by employees remain only between 4 and 6 percent (Zamosky, 2014). The lack of adequate information regarding these services, the perceived stigma associated with asking for help, and the fear that any sensitive information divulged to an EAP provider may not be kept confidential, contribute to this low utilization rate (Zamosky, 2014). An important note is that the purview of EAPs does not include financial support, nor does it include providing legal advice or representation, however, employee access to independent and affordable legal, medical, and therapeutic services may be provided (Taylor, 2016).

EAPs have been historically under-marketed by employers, yet they can benefit employees and employers significantly. Workplace discrimination and sexual harassment are issues that have seen a significant increase in public awareness, and how employers respond to these issues has been subject to increasing levels of scrutiny, especially as it relates to "silent" disorders such as post-traumatic stress, depression, and other behavioral issues. Appropriately promoting and partnering with their EAPs can be an effective way for employers to demonstrate support for equitable treatment in their organizations. By collaborating with their EAPs, employers are better able to stay current with the evolving legal landscape in this area, both domestically and internationally.

Organizations with an international presence face the risk that their worldwide employees will underutilize internationally-based EAP services if they find them "culturally irrelevant" (Sharar, 2016). This is particularly important when Western-based employers have a presence in countries with a collectivist culture. Western-styled EAPs are not readily adaptable to Eastern-based employer locations where the culture focuses on promoting harmony in the workplace and the individual's compliance with group norms rather than the Western focus of primarily addressing personal issues (Sharar, 2016). As such, Western-based employers immersed in individualist cultures could benefit significantly by aligning with EAP providers overseas that staff individuals who understand the customs and speak the native languages of their international employees fluently, rather than those who are merely providing interpretation services. A standard international protocol addresses eight areas 1) socially-conscious compensation as being fundamental to the quality of work-life, 2) insurances of safe and healthy working conditions, 3) investments in increasing human capital, 4) opportunities for growth and job security, 5) satisfaction of social needs in the workplace, 6) creation of cultural norms and stability in employee expectations, 7) the opportunity to create a balance between work and personal demands, and 8) a recognition of how and where their work fits into advancing societal needs (Bophela & Govender, 2015; Walton, 1973).

If implemented properly, an employer can measure the EAP's effectiveness with regard to its impact on employee outcomes and business objectives. In the past, organizations measured the effectiveness and the outcomes of employee utilization of EAP services by focusing primarily on utilization rates and survey data regarding employee symptom or issue resolution (Sharar & DeLapp, 2017). However, as with any Human Resource proposition, it is essential for proponents of EAPs to examine benefits from a value-added direction to show employers demonstrable monetary gains from their investments (Mintzer, Morrow, Tamburo, Sharar, & Herlihy, 2018). By analyzing employee utilization of EAP services in ways that show quantifiable business outcomes that have been linked to organizational performance, such as presenteeism, absenteeism, life-satisfaction, distress in the workplace, and engagement, employers can better assess the effectiveness of EAP usage on their own individual business outcomes (Sharar & DeLapp, 2017). In addition, organizations can determine whether a particular EAP service is a good fit for both the organization and its employees.

Research has shown a myriad of benefits that are positively linked to EAP utilization. In fact, recent research evaluating the impact of EAP utilization through federal government employees has shown demonstrable and significant positive organizational effects for workplace...