From Performative Perks to Sustainable Wellbeing and Performance
Why an evidence‑based approach to culture and wellbeing delivers better outcomes than guesswork
In this month’s edition, Dr Tom Hammond, Manager – Partnerships and Engagement at the Cairnmillar Institute, explores one of the most persistent myths in workplace wellbeing: that employee wellbeing can be improved through perks and individually focused initiatives alone. Drawing on large-scale research and organisational psychology, this article examines why performative wellbeing efforts often backfire and what organisations must focus on instead to create environments that support both sustainable wellbeing and high performance.
The Rise and Limits of Workplace Perks
For years, workplace perks such as free lunches, beanbag chairs, and premium mindfulness apps have been promoted as drivers of employee wellbeing and organisational culture. Often introduced with good intentions, they are meant to signal care and commitment to employee mental health. However, reality is increasingly setting in. You cannot out‑perk a broken system.
Why Wellbeing Is Not an Add‑On
Despite their visibility, superficial amenities have largely failed to move the needle on employee wellbeing. The reason is simple: wellbeing is not something that can be purchased or bolted onto an organisation. It is a structural outcome of culture shaped by how work is designed, how leaders behave, and how performance is defined and rewarded. When organisations rely on perks to compensate for systemic problems, wellbeing becomes cosmetic rather than meaningful.
What the Evidence Shows
The evidence is clear. A major study involving approximately 46,000 workers found that individual‑level wellbeing interventions including wellness apps, resilience training, and relaxation practices delivered no improvement in average employee wellbeing¹. These findings reinforce what many employees already experience: individual interventions cannot compensate for unhealthy systems.
The Risk of Carewashing
When meditation sessions or yoga classes are used as responses to excessive workloads, role ambiguity, poor leadership or toxic management, employees quickly see through the façade. Often described as carewashing, these superficial wellness initiatives breed cynicism and leave teams and individuals more disengaged than if the company had done nothing at all².
What Employees Are Actually Asking For
Modern employees are increasingly sceptical of these performative culture efforts; they don’t want ping-pong tables, but rather an environment defined by healthy, productive ways of thinking and acting.³ This includes manageable workloads, clarity around roles, fair expectations, supportive leadership, and environments where people can perform effectively without sacrificing their wellbeing. These factors also align closely with current guidance from workplace safety regulators on psychosocial risk management.
The Emergence of the Anti-Perk Movement
As a result, many organisations are experiencing a deliberate anti‑perk movement, shifting away from gimmicks that fail to deliver systemic and measurable impact⁴. A fundamental shift is required, moving away from individually focused support mechanisms and toward the transformational factors of the organisation, such as leadership capability, culture, and strategy⁵⁻⁶.
Building the Foundation
If perks and meditation apps provide a temporary band-aid, effective cultures address the underlying issue, creating a sustainable environment for both wellbeing and high performance. Effective cultures require deliberate attention and are meticulously built by leveraging four evidence-based pillars:
- Achievement: Setting realistic, challenging goals where excellence is the standard, rather than chaotic hustle.
- Self-Actualising: Fostering an environment where people genuinely enjoy their work, innovate, and experience personal growth.
- Humanistic Encouraging: Empowering leaders and peers to actively support one another, resolve conflicts constructively, and mentor those around them.
- Affiliative: Valuing cooperation and prioritising strong, trusting, and unified team relationships.⁷
When organisations invest in effective culture, they create the prerequisite conditions for employee wellbeing to occur. Wellbeing becomes part of how work is led, experienced and sustained every day. However, culture alone is not enough.
Organisational wellbeing is shaped not only by shared values and behaviours, but by the systems of work that determine how people manage workload, resolve conflict, communicate, and make decisions. From a psychosocial safety perspective, wellbeing cannot rely primarily on individual/team resilience or voluntary wellbeing programs; it depends on whether people are operating in environments that are psychologically safe, respectful, and sustainable. This includes proactively identifying psychosocial hazards early, addressing workload and role clarity, building leadership capability, strengthening consultation and communication, and responding to conflict or harmful behaviours before they escalate. Crucially, prevention must be embedded into organisational systems rather than addressed reactively.
In Victoria, this integrated approach is now a legal requirement. Under the OHS (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025, employers have explicit duties to identify, control, and regularly review psychosocial risks. This regulatory shift reinforces that employee wellbeing must be supported through safe systems of work, supported by effective organisational cultures not through standalone wellbeing initiatives alone.⁹
Ultimately, organisations that align strong cultural foundations with psychosocial safety obligations are better positioned to protect employee wellbeing, enable high performance, and meet regulatory requirements. Culture, systems, and compliance are interrelated and mutually reinforcing. While the Regulations set minimum expectations, organisations that go further by aligning culture with systems of work are more likely to sustain wellbeing and performance over time.
Moving from Guesswork to Measurement
Effective cultures are not built on intuition alone. They are measured, diagnosed, and deliberately shaped. At the Cairnmillar Institute, we partner with organisations to look beyond surface‑level wellbeing initiatives, using robust, data‑driven diagnostics to understand what is truly shaping behaviour and performance. If you are seeking sustainable wellbeing outcomes rather than performative solutions, connect with us: Organisational Services | The Cairnmillar Institute
About Dr Tom Hammond
Dr. Tom Hammond (Tom H.) leads the partnership and engagement at the Cairnmillar Institute. With over 16 years of international experience across healthcare, government, not‑for‑profit, banking, professional sport, and higher education sectors, he has held senior executive roles in both higher‑education and private organisations, leading wellbeing strategy, people science, engagement, and organisational performance initiatives. He completed his doctoral training in clinical psychology and holds an MBA specialising in business consulting, as well as a Master of Science in performance psychology.
About The Cairnmillar Institute: Founded in 1961, The Cairnmillar Institute is an independent, not-for- profit organisation dedicated to advancing the mental health and resilience of communities across Australia. We provide higher and tertiary education (from vocational to doctoral degrees) with primary focus on psychology, counselling and psychotherapy, accessible mental health services, applied research, and evidence-based capability and workforce development. With more than 65 years of experience, we have built a strong reputation for practical education, high quality clinical care, community engagement, and strong graduate outcomes. Our approach is guided by the Triple Helix model, which connects research, education and clinical practice in a single integrated system. This model ensures that evidence informs service delivery, insights from practice shape teaching and professional training, and research stays connected to real community needs.
References
- Fleming, W. J. (2024). Employee well-being outcomes from individual-level mental health interventions: Cross-sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Industrial Relations Journal, 55, 162–182.
- Gube, M., Mathieu, C., & Hennelly, D. S. (2024). How carewashing alienates employees. Harvard Business Review.
- Culture Partners. (2024, December 6). My predictions for the 2025 workplace trends. https://culturepartners.com/insights/my-predictions-for-the-2025-workplace-trends/
- Yadav, P. (2026, February 12). Anti-perks: Why companies are ditching flashy benefits for real impact. Qandle. https://www.qandle.com/blog/anti-perks/
- Burke, W. W. (2023). Organization change: Theory and practice (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
- World Economic Forum. (2025). Why prioritizing employee well-being is good for business: A shift to systemic organizational design. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/03/prioritizing-employee-wellbeing-good-for-business/
- Cooke, R. A., & Lafferty, J. C. (1987). Organizational Culture Inventory. Human Synergistics International
- Sonnentag, S., Tay, L., & Nesher Shoshan, H. (2023). A review on health and well‐being at work: More than stressors and strains. Personnel Psychology, 76(2), 473-510.
- State Government of Victoria Occupational Health and Safety (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025 | legislation.vic.gov.au