There are many instances I can point to where the research and the advice on a specific subject is decades ahead of the practice.
However, in the case of stress and it’s deleterious effect on performance, it seems that the practice is regressing from the research at an ever-increasing rate. The points in the article above are oft repeated and well-supported. What’s not mentioned in the article is the significant cost to organizations in lost productivity and increased healthcare expenditures that are the result of ignoring stress in the workplace.
If that’s the case, though, why is there so little movement in the right direction on this issue? I think we all know the answer to that question, and it can be expressed in a simple equation:
short-term costs > long-term risks = fewer resources today
As long as the short term costs are seen as more pressing than the value of bringing on and effectively training enough of the right employees to avoid long-term costs associated with stress, the stress will continue.