Health and wellbeing

Work-related stress is an important consideration when exploring the health and wellbeing of staff, and there are various elements of an individual’s role that may contribute to such stress.

• 76% of the primary prevention workforce reported that they experienced at least moderate work-related stress, and 31% experienced high, very high or severe levels.¹
• 76% of those who experienced at least moderate stress reported that this was due to a high volume of work / high demands of their role, whilst 61% also cited poor management or organisational issues.²

Respondents were asked to comment on the frequency with which they experienced several factors that may contribute to workplace stress (see Figure 17 for full results).

In line with the findings above, a high workload was reported to be a frequent issue for almost half of this workforce, with 48% reporting that they only sometimes (or less often) felt that they had sufficient time to complete their tasks.

Despite this, there were also many positive results to note. Overall, almost nine-in-ten of the primary prevention workforce indicated that they felt safe in performing their role (88% always or often – though it should be noted that a minority, 12%, only felt safe sometimes, or less often).

Other positive findings suggested that many felt respected and fairly consulted in undertaking their work, with over three-quarters of this workforce reporting that they always / often felt that:

• their cultural identity was recognised and respected at work (78%);
• they receive the respect they believe they deserve from their colleagues (76%); and
• they have a say about the way that they work (76%).

Other encouraging results were reported regarding workplace conflicts and bullying / harassment, with a low incidence of such negative stressors within this workforce, although again a minority did report experiencing these always /often (12%-15%).

Although high volume of work and poor management were the most cited causes of workplace stress, over one-quarter of those who experienced at least high stress also mentioned staff turnover (41%), backlash or resistance (32%), external pressures (30%), and vicarious trauma (27%).

Given the unique type of work that this workforce undertakes, backlash / resistance³ is a particularly important factor to consider when exploring workplace stress amongst this audience.

• 22% of respondents always / often experienced backlash or resistance in undertaking their work.⁴
• 64% reported that they have access to support if they encounter resistance or backlash in their work.⁵

Although not a core requirement of their role, primary prevention practitioners may also encounter family violence cases or disclosures in undertaking their work.

• 80% of respondents indicated that they have access to support if they encounter cases of family violence or disclosures in their work.

Although broadly positive, these results suggest that there may be scope to either increase the level of support available or increase the awareness of such support amongst this workforce. Respondents who indicated that they have access to support if they encounter cases of family violence or disclosures, or backlash / resistance were additionally asked how effective they felt this support was. Overall, 55% felt that this support was either very or extremely effective, whilst 42% felt it was moderately effective. None felt that the support provided was ineffective (see Figure 18).

Overall, three-quarters of the primary prevention workforce indicated that they were satisfied in their current role (75% – see Figure 19).

Positively, only a minority expressed dissatisfaction (10%), whilst 15% were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied in their role.

Respondents were additionally asked to comment on how much difference they believe their work makes to people affected by family violence.

45% indicated that they felt that their work makes a significant difference to people affected by family violence, whilst 52% felt their work makes a moderate difference.⁶

There was not a strong correlation between overall role satisfaction and whether one felt that their role made a positive difference to people affected by family violence, suggesting that differences in satisfaction levels may be driven by various other factors.

Overall satisfaction differed by some demographic cohorts, as follows:

Years of experience – those who had been in their current role for more than 5 years were less likely than those with a shorter tenure to be satisfied in their current role (67% of those with 5 to 10 years’ tenure, compared to 78%-80% of those with less than 5 years’ tenure).

Organisation size – those working in medium-sized organisations (50-199 staff) were less likely than average to be satisfied in their current role (66% versus 75% on average).

Perceptions of the difference their work made differed by some demographic cohorts, as follows:

Age – those aged 55+ were more likely than their youngest colleagues to feel that their work made a significant difference to people affected by family violence (53% versus 41% of those aged 18-34).

Years of experience – those who had been in their current role for 2 to 4 years were least likely to feel that their work made a significant difference to people affected by family violence (34%, versus 45% on average).

Organisation size – perceptions that their work made a significant difference to people affected by family violence reduced as organisation size increased, with 52% of those in smaller organisations (1-49 staff) indicating that they felt this way, compared to 38% of staff in organisation with more than 200 staff.

Organisation type – those working in an organisation that specialises in legal services were more likely than average to indicate that they felt their role made a significant difference to people affected by family violence (61% versus 45% on average).

Investigating satisfaction with various elements of their roles revealed that the primary prevention workers were most satisfied with the nature of the work that they perform and working conditions (85% and 80% respectively – see Figure 20).

In contrast, the main areas for improvement where respondents indicated that they were least satisfied included:

• opportunities for advancement (42% satisfied, 36% dissatisfied)
• supporting and mentoring (53% satisfied, 25% dissatisfied)
• pay/compensation (58% satisfied, 25% dissatisfied).

In order to determine what is most important in influencing variation in overall levels of role satisfaction, regression analysis was undertaken. The results suggest that the key drivers were having positive perceptions of:

• practice guidance
• supporting and mentoring
• workload and hours.

Respondents were asked to explain what they felt to be the top three most important changes that could be made to enable them to carry out their work more effectively. Free-text comments were coded into themes, with the main themes illustrated in Figure 21.