In early 2023, new psychosocial hazard legislation came into effect across Australia under the Workplace, Health and Safety laws. While many organisations are still coming to grips with what this means for their risk agendas, one thing is becoming clear: the way we lead has never mattered more.
I recently had the opportunity to attend a trial run of a new training day focused on understanding and preventing psychosocial harm in the workplace. The program, designed for CEOs, senior leaders, principals, community leaders, etc., was exemplary. It asked leaders to consider their impact on workplace mental health through the lens of how they lead change, manage productivity expectations, communicate, set behavioural standards, structure accountability, and more.
It was during this training that I found myself asking a deeper question: why do we even need legislation to address something that should be common sense and common decency? Why have we had to legislate against poor leadership, against &%^ bosses, if we’re being blunt?
As someone who has personally experienced significant harm in a previous workplace, I recognise the value of these reforms. They are a step forward, providing both protection and a mechanism for those who are suffering. But will they address the root cause?
I’m not confident.
My leadership experience has been in schools, arguably the most complex organisations to lead. Schools don’t produce a single, tangible product. They deliver dozens of services simultaneously: early literacy, senior physics, wellbeing programs, pastoral care, counselling, sport, music tuition, drama productions, and the list goes on.
Over the years, I’ve watched previously thriving schools spiral into dysfunction almost overnight following the appointment of the wrong principal. In many of those cases, the leader’s tenure is short-lived, but not before the damage has been done, to morale, culture, and wellbeing. And the cost? Considerable. Even after the removal of the leader it can take a school years, even a decade to fully recover. I know because I had to do just that job.
Leadership matters. It has an outsized impact on culture, and culture directly affects the psychological safety of staff. Some research suggests that up to 70% of organisational culture is shaped by the behaviour and example of the leader. So, if the culture is toxic, chances are, it’s because of the leadership.
In this sense, poor leadership is a psychosocial hazard.
So yes, this legislation may prompt some much-needed reflection. It gives leaders a reason to pause and reconsider how their actions impact others. It may also empower staff with greater protections. That’s the good news.
But real change won’t come from compliance alone.
Attending high-quality training, like the one developed by ViVA Health at Work, is a valuable step. Encouragingly, leadership development sits at the heart of that program. But laws and training can only go so far. Ultimately, what’s required is not just a change in knowledge or behaviour, but a change of heart.
You can’t legislate for integrity. You can’t mandate empathy. You can’t force someone to genuinely value the people they lead.
Creating safe, healthy workplaces begins when leaders stop seeing staff as cogs in a productivity machine and start recognising their role as stewards of people. It starts when they ask themselves the deeper questions: What do I believe about leadership? Who am I here to serve? What culture am I creating through my actions, daily?
Unless leaders are willing to confront those questions honestly, we may see surface-level compliance with the new laws, but little genuine change.
Because in the end, doing the right things isn’t the same as doing the right thing.
Dr Paul Browning OAM was a school principal for 25 years. His PhD focused on the leadership practices that create a culture of trust. He is now the managing director of Vivedus. Paul’s PhD work has been built into the Vivedus Platform, ensuring leaders have access to live data about the current culture of the school they lead.
