Assessing Impact: The Effectiveness of Workplace Work-Life Balance Programmes BRIEFING PAPER AUGUST 2025 Authors Zhiqing E. Zhou Associate Professor, Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Pamela Y. Collins Bloomberg Centennial Professor and Chair, Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthRuma Bharava Lead, Mental Health Initiative, World Economic Forum Andy Moose Head, Health and Wellness, World Economic Forum Introduction Many working adults must balance work with non-work domains, such as family, personal life and community – and this work-life balance is increasingly recognized. A recent Gallup survey 1 of 10,000 US employees found it to be the top factor when choosing a new job. Research over the past 40 years in organizational psychology and behaviour, management and human resource management has documented the benefits of positive work-life experiences. For employees, these benefits include better physical and mental health, lower burnout and greater life satisfaction. 2, 3 For organizations, benefits include improved employee performance, stronger commitment, better workplace relationships and lower turnover intent. Given these benefits, interest in promoting employee work- life balance has grown among researchers and practitioners, leading to the development of numerous workplace progammes designed to support it. For organizations and leaders, it is important to understand which programmes have been implemented and evaluated, what tends to be effective, and what many fall short before pursuing adoption. (The term “workplace programmes” refers to any interventions, programmes, or changes implemented in the workplace.) This executive briefing is the first in a series developed to support of the World Economic Forum’s Healthy Workforces initiative – a collaboration between the Forum, its partners and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It introduces examples of workplace programmes implemented at the organizational, team and employee levels, and reviews evidence on their effectiveness. Work-life balance defined Before examining workplace work-life balance programmes evaluated in research, let’s explain how work-life balance is defined. Over the past 40 years, researchers have extensively studied various aspects of workers’ experiences as indicators of work-life balance. Yet, several notable differences exist. While the work domain is well-defined, studies vary in how they frame the non-work domain – most commonly focusing on family as the specific life or non-work domain (e.g. work-family balance). The concept of balance is also defined in multiple ways: as a lack of work-family conflict, as a combination of low work- family conflict and high work-family enrichment, or as an overall evaluation of compatibility between work and life domains. To address these inconsistencies in how work-life balance is defined, Casper and colleagues 4 reviewed multiple conceptualizations of work-life balance, and proposed a new definition “employees’ evaluation of the favourability of their combination of work and non-work roles, arising from the degree to which their affective experiences and their perceived involvement and effectiveness in work and non-work roles are commensurate with the value they attach to these roles”(p.197). While this definition can help address the

Assessing Impact 2025