Mental health at work: a challenge to be structured for companies and investors

Still only loosely formalized in social and ESG policies, employees’ mental health is nevertheless emerging as a central issue for corporate performance. Against this backdrop, the working group “Mental health: a responsibility for both companies and investors,” co-led by Sycomore Asset Management, met on 9 December for an initial exploratory workshop to open the debate.

How should mental health be addressed within companies? This question framed the first session of the group, bringing together investors, companies, and experts to establish a shared diagnosis of a topic that remains insufficiently structured: employees’ mental health.

At the origin of this initiative lies a shared observation between financial actors and companies: the limited integration of mental health considerations into ESG analysis practices. While responsible investment frameworks incorporate environmental, social, and governance criteria, the social dimension often lacks robust tools. The objective is therefore to align corporate employer commitments with investor criteria, integrating mental health alongside other social issues.

This approach builds on Sycomore AM’s proprietary Happy@Work methodology, designed to value human capital management and inform shareholder dialogue. As noted by Claire Mouchotte, Sustainability Analyst at Sycomore AM, supporting individual well-being is a driver of corporate performance, whereas poor management of human capital and employee health carries significant costs.

Defining mental health

Christophe André, psychiatrist and psychotherapist, recalled that good mental health can be defined as “the absence of excessive, lasting, destabilizing suffering, and the presence of sufficient moments of well-being,” while acknowledging that defining mental health remains subject to debate.

For Martin Richer, founder of Management & RSE and head of the Work and Employment division at Terra Nova, overly medical terminology should be avoided, and “mental health” remains the most appropriate term. He noted that 35% to 45% of sick leave cases are linked to mental health issues.

The discussion also highlighted the importance of terminology. Nina Tarhouny, legal expert in organizational prevention of psychosocial risks and founder of Global Impact, argued that the term “psychosocial risks” is misleading, as it often shifts focus toward individual psychology rather than organizational causes. She favors the term “socio-organizational risks,” which places the emphasis back on work organization and its impact on individuals.

More visible forms of suffering

This clarification goes beyond semantics. For a long time, companies preferred to speak of “well-being” or “quality of life at work,” which was less demanding. The shift toward quality of working life and conditions (QVCT) seeks to reintegrate organizational structure into prevention policies.

Healthcare professionals reported an increase in the recognition of psychological conditions as occupational diseases. As noted by Geneviève Thiaucourt, Medical Director for Occupational Health at Saint-Gobain, cases have risen from one or two per year in the past to three or four annually today. This reflects both better awareness and more visible suffering.

At the same time, comparisons over time remain difficult, as psychological suffering was previously less openly expressed. Recognition as an occupational disease requires a permanent disability level of at least 25%, meaning only severe cases qualify.

A legal and organizational responsibility

Participants also addressed corporate responsibility. While companies are not required to make employees happy, they are responsible for creating conditions that allow them to preserve their health.

Since the 2015 Air France ruling, French labor law imposes an enhanced duty of care. Employers can avoid liability if they demonstrate that all necessary preventive measures were taken.

As explained by Esther Szwarc, coordinating physician at Orange, this framework encourages companies to implement concrete preventive actions. It brings the debate back to practical measures rather than imposing unrealistic obligations.

Managers and early warning signals

Managers play a central role in identifying early warning signals: unusual lateness, repeated mistakes, isolation, excessive self-imposed workloads, neglect of rest, or declining personal care.

However, remote work has weakened managerial proximity. Subtle signals that would be noticeable in person can be missed at a distance. Managerial proximity requires training, time, and institutional recognition.

Surveys show that only 18% of French employees feel able to speak easily with their manager about psychological distress, and only 15% believe their manager genuinely values mental well-being.

Occupational health services also play an important role, though they face resource constraints, particularly a shortage of occupational physicians. This situation is beginning to improve as interest in occupational health grows among younger medical professionals.

Mental health as a blind spot in responsible investment

From an investor perspective, mental health remains an emerging issue. As acknowledged by Karine Leymarie of the MAIF, it is rarely identified explicitly, even in socially oriented investment discussions. Companies themselves provide limited documentation on the subject, making integration into investment decisions more difficult.

Participants also highlighted the impact of artificial intelligence on work organization. Companies that struggle to assess socio-organizational risks today will find it even more challenging to manage the transformations brought by AI. The principles, however, remain the same: anticipation, human impact assessment, and support.

Toward structured recommendations

This first workshop emphasized the need to move beyond individual approaches and address work organization, management practices, and policy coherence. It marks an initial step for the working group, which aims to develop recommendations enabling companies and investors to integrate mental health as both a performance issue and a matter of social responsibility.