Rethinking Quality of Work Life: A Strategic Framework for HR Leaders

Part I in a series of Quality of Work Life articles brought to you by the SHRM Florida Analytics and Innovation Committee

By Abram Walton, Ph.D. & Alex Silverman, M.S.

Opening the Quality of Work Life Conversation

After over 50 years of research, why do most organizations still misunderstand or misapply the concept of Quality of Work Life (QWL)? Too often, QWL is conflated with “wellness,” which narrows its scope and reduces it to a collection of programs rather than a holistic framework that links employee experience to organizational outcomes. The result is a proliferation of initiatives that appear personalized, but in practice segment employees into groups of those who find value in the resources, thereby having their needs met – and those who go without. In HR, we have been diligent about building business cases, tracking usage numbers, and making investments in programs that largely address hygiene factors – sometimes even using vanity metrics to prop up program justifications without addressing the truly unmet needs. These hygiene factors are not without merit – they are a necessary condition for preventing or assuaging dissatisfaction – but they are not sufficient to improve the performance outcomes executives care most about.

If we focused instead on satisfying motivational needs in addition to hygiene needs, we would improve the quality of work life for each people group within our organizations, including across all levels of performance and business functions. Evidence shows that when QWL is poorly supported, increases in turnover, disengagement, and preventable costs ensue. The decades of scientific research literature paint a clear picture: current approaches often focus on checking boxes for compliance and trend adoption, risking over-investment in hygiene at the expense of motivators, and leading to resource misallocation, limited impact, and an overall misunderstanding of the true importance and value of QWL. To shift this trajectory, HR must calibrate its approach and democratize QWL – moving beyond the commoditization of wellness to a framework that strategically connects people’s needs with organizational resilience.

Recycling the Same Old Perks: What’s Been Done Before

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory provides a useful lens to understand why so many QWL initiatives fall short. Herzberg, and countless researchers who followed, argued that workplace factors can be divided into “hygiene” elements – those which are necessary to resolve or prevent dissatisfaction, and “motivator” or “satisfier” elements – those which drive deeper levels of engagement, growth, satisfaction, and organizational commitment (e.g., performance) behaviors. Unfortunately, most of our wellness programs fall squarely into the hygiene category. They may temporarily reduce complaints or meet short-term needs, but rarely create the meaningful motivation or stronger organizational performance to which we aspire. This imbalance explains why so much of what “has been done before” feels recycled or ineffective; our current approach treats hygienic symptoms of dissatisfaction without addressing the deeper motivational drivers of engagement and performance.

In practice, this overemphasis on hygiene manifests in the widespread adoption of standardized, surface-level wellness programs that appear innovative but do not address systemic QWL drivers – employees’ core, relational and contextual needs. Standardized Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs), generic mindfulness apps (think Calm or Headspace), wellness compliance workshops or dashboards, gym subsidies, mental or physical health awareness days or programs, and more are all well-intentioned but often symbolic or procedure-oriented. While these may very well be important programs, by over-investing in hygiene-oriented benefits while underinvesting in motivators like autonomy, career development, and purpose-driven work, organizations leave the true potential of QWL untapped.

Filling in the Gap: Motivators Left on the Table

The real gap is most wellness programs ignore truly democratized (i.e., individualized) needs – both personal (e.g., mental or physical health) and professional (e.g., how employees choose to “level up” in their careers). Too often, leaders miss chances to support self-directed improvement such as pursuing tuition reimbursement (even for micro certificates), speaking at conferences, or training in new or emerging skills, like project management or artificial intelligence. When managers dismiss these efforts as distractions, employees feel discouraged, psychologically invalidated, and more likely to consider leaving.

Moreover, by tending to focus on more commonly implemented EAP-type programs instead of performance-oriented programs, companies risk creating dual classes of employees. High performers – or those aspiring to upskill – may feel overlooked when benefits do not address their growth and motivational needs, increasing the risk of disengagement or attrition. At the same time, organizations find it challenging to shift resources away from low-risk, symbolic programs toward more impactful, performance-focused offerings. The unintended result is imbalance: hygiene factors are supported, but motivator-driven programs that could retain and elevate top talent are left underdeveloped.

A better approach might be for us to curate opportunities at the individual subgroup level and empower employees to co-develop training and certification pathways that align with both their personal goals and organizational priorities.

Implementing a New QWL Framework: Speaking the C-Suite Language Through Dimensions that Matter

If quality of work life is to serve as a practical tool for HR leaders, it needs more than theoretical grounding – it needs strategy that translates research into structure. Mapping our HR endeavors to a robust QWL framework may help us more holistically track employee wellness, and understand the underpinnings of all it entails. This requires shifting from standardized, symbolic initiatives to comprehensive, personalized offerings that can be linked directly to individualized behavior and performance outcomes.

In Herzberg’s terms, we remember that hygiene factors are a necessary but not sufficient condition for improving performance. As an example, employees are seven times more likely to stay in an organization if they have a friend, but this does not necessarily impact their performance. While this social component of wellness is necessary to reduce isolation and meet baseline needs for belonging, without corollary or complimentary motivators like growth opportunities or autonomy, hygiene alone will not elevate performance. If we want to take our own HR advice and also continuously level-up how seriously we are taken in the board room, then we need to focus on prioritizing the motivational and performance enhancement opportunities that are designed into the benefits packages we create. Instead of being easily satiated by the low hanging fruit of hygiene factor-oriented programs, let’s remember to reach higher towards those truly fulfilling, motivationally-oriented offerings.

The Eight Dimensions of QWL: 

In an effort to distill the nearly half-century of literature on this topic down into a practical and usable model in the HR domain, we have constructed a simple three-layer, eight-factor framework. Together, these dimensions offer a roadmap for evaluating and improving the employee experience in ways that directly connect to organizational outcomes.

Core Needs (Individual Focus):

1. Compensation & Economic Security – Market-based pay, perpetual skill relevance, and job security.

2. Health, Safety, & Well-Being – Safe working conditions, preferrable stress levels, and support for physical and mental health. 

3. Work Design, Control, & Autonomy – Opportunities to use skills, exercise control over work, and experience meaningful, motivating roles. 

4. Career & Development Opportunities – Training, mentoring, growth patways, and recognition that fuels engagement and retention. 

Food for thought: Do your employees have free yearly access to micro-certification courses (e.g., Udemy or Coursera)? Is it bolstered by management’s support and appreciation of autonomous and self-directed professional development? The C-suite’s concern with this could be what happens if we pay for our employees to level-up and they leave? However, the detriment of this way of thinking is overt: what happens if your employees don’t level-up and they stay? An employee’s self-directed personal or professional improvement should be a no-brainer business case for leaders to support, but they might need help from HR to craft the appropriate justification or narrative.

Relational Needs (Organizational / Interpersonal Focus):

5. Social & Interpersonal Relationships – Belongingness, teamwork, fairness in interactions, and strong peer connections. 

6. Organizational Justice & Constitutionalism – Transparency, due process, and employee voice in decision-making. 

Food for thought: Rather than creating affinity groups or social clubs that attract only a subset of employees, we could provide curated wellness communities – such as peer-coaching or networking circles – that align with employees’ personal goals while still fostering genuine social connection.

Contextual Needs (Life & Societal Focus):

7. Work-Life Balance – Equilibrium and integration between professional and personal roles, supported by flexible policies; time sovereignty, caregiving support, workload spillover boundaries.

8. Social & Societal Relevance – Alignment between organizational purpose, CSR initiatives, and employee values; environmental sustainability practices, community engagement, and ethical supply chains.

Food for thought: What if flexibility extended beyond hybrid work to include caregiving credits, community service hours, or sustainability stipends? Leaders may worry about cost, but the bigger risk is keeping employees who feel burned out or misaligned with company values. Supporting balance and societal relevance builds loyalty, energy, and reputation capital.

Elevating QWL into Strategy

When organizations recognize that QWL is not an optional add-on, programs become a strategic lever tied directly to organizational resilience, retention, and growth. Turning recognition into action requires a structured approach that moves QWL from concept to practice through deliberate, sustainable steps.

1. Self-Audit & Diagnose – or hire a third party auditor to assist in evaluating the percentage of coverage across the either QWL dimensions, identifying gaps, and prioritizing areas of focus.

2. Build the Business Case – quantify the cost of inaction: lost opportunities, high-performer turnover risk, disengagement, and other key HR metrics

3. Strategize for ROI – design a QWL improvement plan that prioritizes initiatives with measurable impact on performance, retention, and well-being.

4. Implement and Integrate – put the plan into practice, embedding QWL improvements into daily management, policies, and culture rather than siloed programs.

5. Continuously Re-Audit: Don’t Set It and Forget It – people’s needs evolve. Conduct ongoing audits and reflections throughout the year to demonstrate commitment and keep initiatives relevant. Doing so will signal to your employees that you are committed to meeting their needs.

A one-size-fits-all approach (or one that provides a semblance of choice through a predetermined buffet without true democratization) – leaves valuable resources and performance outcomes on the cutting room floor. The evidence shows a clear misalignment: while organizations spend heavily on employee assistance or generic benefits, the ROI in terms of productivity, engagement, and reduced claims is often minimal. Addressing this gap requires a framework that connects wellness approaches directly to the dimensions of QWL – compensation, safety, autonomy, career growth, relationships, justice, work-life balance, and societal relevance. Only by mapping approaches to these dimensions, as well as acknowledging how these dimensions fit within hygiene or motivator factors, can organizations calibrate their strategies, improve their impact, and provide organizational-wide ROI. Happy Democratizing!