Recent global data highlight the urgent need for systemic action on workplace mental health and wellbeing. Gallup's (2024) State of the Global Workplace report reveals that fewer than 25% of employees worldwide are actively engaged, with 62% disengaged and 15% actively disengaged. Only 34% of workers report thriving, while the remaining 66% are either struggling (58%) or suffering (8%). Moreover, daily negative emotions are prevalent, with 41% of employees reporting stress, 21% anger, 22% sadness, and 20% loneliness.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, the trends are equally concerning. Engagement levels are particularly low, with only 20% of employees actively engaged and 17% actively disengaged. Stress (48%), sadness (28%), anger (25%), and loneliness (26%) are widespread. Life evaluation data indicates that just 17% of employees consider themselves to be thriving, while 74% report struggling. Additionally, 75% of employees are either actively looking for or open to new job opportunities (Gallup, 2024). These figures signal a substantial risk of attrition, burnout, and reduced organizational performance if wellbeing remains unaddressed.

These concerns are especially pronounced among younger generations. The Deloitte (2024) Gen Z and Millennial Survey, spanning over 22,800 respondents across 44 countries, identifies mental health as a top issue among younger workers. Forty percent of Gen Z respondents and 35% of millennials report feeling stressed most of the time, with only half rating their mental health positively. Workplace factors such as lack of recognition, excessive workloads, low task completion capacity, limited purpose, and social exclusion are key contributors.

Addressing these challenges is not only a moral imperative but also an economic one. Baicker et al. (2010) found that for every dollar spent on employee wellness programmes, organizations save $3.27 in medical costs and $2.73 in absenteeism. Evidence further suggests that workplace-based mental health interventions can reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety while enhancing engagement and productivity (Gartlehner et al., 2016; Joyce et al., 2016). Organizations that assess employee wellbeing proactively and invest in evidence-based interventions—such as stress management, psychological support, and structured training—are better positioned to foster a healthy, productive, and resilient workforce.

Despite the growing global interest in wellbeing and positive psychology, most intervention studies remain geographically concentrated in Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) countries. Hendriks et al. (2019) report that over half of all wellbeing interventions have been conducted in North America (53.3%) and a third in Europe (34.1%), with Australia and New Zealand contributing 6.3%. In contrast, developing countries such as South Africa account for only 0.2% of these studies. This disproportion underscores a critical lack of empirical research in non-Western and lower-income settings, raising concerns about the generalizability and cultural relevance of existing intervention models.

The scarcity of workplace-based wellbeing interventions is particularly notable. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by Weiss et al. (2016) identified only 27 psychological wellbeing interventions globally, of which just two were workplace-based. However, neither study included engagement or stress as outcome variables. One study by Addley et al. (2014) focused on routine health screenings rather than psychological change, while the other (Page and Vella-Brodrick, 2013) had a limited sample size of 12 participants, constraining its generalizability. These findings point to a significant gap in rigorous, workplace-specific interventions that target key constructs such as engagement, stress, and subjective wellbeing.

A similar geographical imbalance is evident in reviews of positive psychology interventions (PPIs). In their review of 863 studies, Kim et al. (2018) found only 25 publications from the African continent—highlighting a substantial research deficit across the region. Guse (2022), in a scoping review of PPIs conducted in Africa, identified only 23 studies aimed at enhancing wellbeing or building positive psychological resources. Notably, none were conducted in workplace settings or examined outcomes such as employee stress or engagement. Guse (2022)) strongly recommended the development of culturally adapted interventions that align with African realities.

Taken together, these findings demonstrate a clear need for contextually relevant, evidence-based wellbeing programmes in African workplaces. This study directly addresses this gap by designing and evaluating a culturally informed, HR-led training intervention tailored to the South African organizational context.

Over the past three decades, the field of human resource management (HRM) has evolved significantly, with substantial progress in clarifying its strategic role and its contribution to organizational performance (Guest, 2017; Saridakis et al., 2017; Saurombe et al., 2022). However, the dominant emphasis on the HRM–performance link has often marginalized employee wellbeing as a core concern. A meta-analysis of eight longitudinal studies found a consistent but moderate relationship between HRM practices and firm performance, suggesting that HR's strategic impact may be overestimated when wellbeing is excluded from the equation (Saridakis et al., 2017). While organizations have gained on performance indicators, employee engagement and wellbeing have declined—globally, only 23% of employees are engaged, and stress-related disorders are on the rise (Gallup, 2024; Quick and Henderson, 2016).

These developments call for a reorientation of HRM to integrate wellbeing as both an ethical priority and a performance-enhancing strategy. Borkowska and Czerw (2022) advocate for reflective, evidence-based, and data-informed HR practices to create supportive and psychologically healthy workplaces.

Emerging evidence suggests that wellbeing interventions can be effectively delivered by non-clinical facilitators. For instance, a randomized controlled trial by Krekel et al. (2021) demonstrated that community-based volunteers—without formal psychological training—successfully delivered the Exploring What Matters course, which significantly improved participants' life satisfaction, social trust, and reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression, with effects sustained 2 months post-intervention. These findings suggest that structured, non-clinician-led interventions can be impactful when appropriately designed and supported.

In the workplace, HR managers are particularly well positioned to lead such interventions. Unlike external facilitators, HR professionals are embedded within the organizational system, possess contextual knowledge, and have direct access to employees (Elufioye et al., 2024). This embeddedness enables them to tailor interventions to the unique challenges and dynamics of their organizations, potentially increasing relevance, uptake, and sustainability.

Despite these advantages, the literature remains limited in documenting the effectiveness of HR-led wellbeing programmes. Most existing research has focused on interventions led by clinicians or implemented in community settings. This study addresses this gap by designing and evaluating a structured, HR-led training programme aimed at enhancing employee wellbeing. By assessing its feasibility and impact in a real-world organizational context, the study contributes practical insights for integrating wellbeing into core HRM strategy.

Multiple meta-analyses have established that psychological wellbeing interventions can significantly enhance mental health outcomes and reduce depressive symptoms (Bolier et al., 2013; Hendriks et al., 2020; Sin and Lyubomirsky, 2009). Although recent work suggests that such interventions may have only modest advantages over active comparators like group-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT; Lim and Tierney, 2022), they remain valuable due to their scalability and accessibility in workplace settings.

This section synthesizes key constructs drawn from the wellbeing literature that were reviewed prior to the intervention design. These constructs were subsequently introduced during focus group discussions (FGDs), where South African employees were invited to select those most relevant to their lived experiences. This approach ensured that the intervention was not only theory-informed but also culturally responsive and contextually grounded.

This literature review formed the foundation for a participatory co-design process, in which employees engaged with the constructs during the FGD phase. Participants reflected on each construct's relevance and feasibility in their personal and organizational context, which informed the final selection of modules for the HR-led wellbeing programme. By combining global evidence with local insights, the intervention was tailored to reflect both psychological science and contextual relevance—an essential step for sustainable impact in South African workplaces.

Owing to article length constraints, we were only able to elaborate a handful of the most prominent constructs above; the complete set of 25 constructs, together with their theoretical anchors and FGD vote tallies, is presented in Table 3 to show how participant preferences directly shaped the final module selection.

The theoretical framework underpinning this study is summarized in Table 1 and visually depicted in Figure 1. It integrates established theories with global workplace data to illustrate the pathway from low employee engagement to thriving and wellbeing through an HR-led intervention.

Grounded in Gallup's (2024) findings on widespread disengagement, the framework positions HR as a key enabler of change by targeting voluntary wellbeing behaviors—aligned with Seligman's (2002) happiness formula. The intervention mechanisms are informed by the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and the PERMA framework, both of which explain how job resources and psychological drivers contribute to flourishing. The framework supports the design of the HR training programme and justifies the study's focus on experiential, strengths-based activities. It also clarifies the expected outcome: measurable improvements in employee wellbeing and engagement.

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify wellbeing constructs with empirical support for improving psychological wellbeing and workplace functioning. Constructs such as mindfulness, gratitude, meaning in life, optimism, forgiveness, and job crafting were selected based on their relevance to workplace outcomes and established efficacy in prior studies (Appiah et al., 2021; Kushlev et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2024). These constructs served as the foundation for the pilot training content.

A 4-h pilot training session was conducted with 19 purposively selected employees. Participants represented a broad range of job functions, grades, and demographic profiles to ensure the intervention design was inclusive and reflective of diverse workplace perspectives. The training introduced each construct through experiential activities, multimedia resources, and reflective exercises. This phase aimed to assess participant engagement, conceptual clarity, and the perceived relevance of the constructs in the South African workplace context.

Immediately following the pilot, a structured focus group discussion was held with the same participants to gather feedback on the training content. Employees were encouraged to reflect individually and then share the three constructs they found most impactful. Their feedback was documented, categorized, and thematically analyzed to identify shared priorities and contextual insights (Page and Vella-Brodrick, 2013; Van Zyl et al., 2019). This participatory process allowed employees to co-design the final structure of the intervention, later branded as the ENGAGE programme.

By integrating evidence-based content with employee-driven refinement, the study ensured that the final intervention was both theoretically grounded and culturally responsive—enhancing its potential for relevance, uptake, and impact within the workplace.

This study employed a qualitative case study approach to design a context-specific HR-led training intervention aimed at enhancing employee wellbeing. Qualitative research was appropriate given the exploratory aim of identifying which wellbeing constructs resonate most within a real-world organizational setting, allowing participants' lived experiences to shape the content of the intervention. The case study design enabled in-depth engagement with a single organization in South Africa, making it possible to tailor the programme to its unique cultural and workplace realities.

The study adopted a constructivist ontological stance, acknowledging that wellbeing is a socially constructed and context-dependent phenomenon (Creswell and Poth, 2018). Employees' perceptions and narratives were treated as valid sources of knowledge, shaped by their interactions, cultural norms, and organizational environment. From an interpretivist epistemological perspective, knowledge was co-constructed through dialogue during pilot training and focus group discussions (FGDs), emphasizing meaning-making and participant voice (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). This alignment of philosophy and methodology allowed the research to yield actionable insights grounded in both theory and the lived experiences of employees, ensuring that the resulting intervention was both evidence-informed and contextually relevant.

Participants were selected from a South African pharmaceutical company using purposive sampling, with the aim of capturing a diverse range of workplace perspectives. A total of 25 employees were invited (from a workforce of 108), of whom 19 participated in both the pilot training and the follow-up focus group discussion. Participants were chosen based on key demographic and professional criteria, including job grade, function, gender, and race, to ensure broad representation across departments.

This selection strategy was intended to surface varied experiences and insights relevant to workplace wellbeing. By incorporating employees from different roles and backgrounds, we ensured that the intervention design was informed by diverse workplace realities, enhancing both cultural sensitivity and practical relevance. The HR team of the pharmaceutical company coordinated logistics and invitations, and participation was voluntary. The final sample size was sufficient for qualitative exploration and co-design within a single-organization case study.

Table 2 presents the demographic and professional characteristics of the study participants, illustrating the diversity in departmental representation, age, qualification, and gender.

A 4-h in-person pilot training session was held at the South African offices of a pharmaceutical company, introducing 25 evidence-based wellbeing constructs through multimedia content. This was followed by a focus group discussion (FGD) with 19 participants to identify and prioritize the most relevant constructs for the final intervention. The FGD, facilitated by the researcher using open-ended prompts and individual reflection, encouraged participants to list and discuss the constructs they found most impactful. Ideas were recorded on a whiteboard, thematically grouped, and then ranked through voting. Constructs such as relationships, mindfulness, sleep, and physical health emerged as common priorities. Table 3 presents the voting outcomes, while the thematic variations—including less emphasized constructs like awe and zest—provided depth for refining the programme. The final ENGAGE model was co-developed based on six constructs that reflected both theoretical grounding and employee relevance.

To ensure the rigor and trustworthiness of the qualitative phase in developing the HR training programme, the study applied the criteria of credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability as outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985).

Credibility was enhanced through methodological triangulation, combining data from a literature review, a pilot training session, and a focus group discussion (FGD). This convergence of sources helped verify the relevance and resonance of selected wellbeing constructs. Participant checking occurred informally during the delivery of the actual training sessions that followed the FGD, enabling participants to validate whether the final training themes accurately reflected their earlier inputs.

Transferability was supported by the use of rich, thick description—particularly in detailing participant demographics, the training context, and the organizational environment—enabling readers to assess the applicability of findings to similar workplace settings. Negative or discrepant responses were documented and considered, allowing for a nuanced and balanced interpretation of the data.

Dependability was ensured through consistent documentation of the research process and decisions. The researcher maintained a reflexive journal using a mobile application to track thoughts, insights, and possible biases throughout the study. Collaboration with the company's training and HR managers during programme design helped ensure alignment with participant feedback and increased internal consistency.

Confirmability was reinforced by maintaining a transparent audit trail of research steps, decisions, and analytical procedures. Prolonged engagement with participants during the intervention development phase further contributed to a deeper understanding of the workplace context and reduced the risk of superficial interpretation.

Collectively, these strategies ensured that the qualitative research process was systematic, transparent, and aligned with established standards for qualitative trustworthiness.

FGD data were analyzed using thematic analysis, following Braun and Clarke's (2006, 2022) six-phase framework. The researcher manually reviewed handwritten notes, whiteboard summaries, and Excel-based inputs to gain familiarity with the data and conduct initial coding. Codes were clustered into broader categories that reflected shared meanings across participants' responses. Themes were then refined for clarity and internal coherence, ensuring they captured key insights relevant to the intervention's development. Direct participant quotes were used to validate interpretations and preserve authenticity. The final themes guided the selection of wellbeing constructs incorporated into the ENGAGE training programme.

This study complied with ethical guidelines for human participant research and received approval from the University of Johannesburg's Research Ethics Committee [Ethics Clearance Code: IPPM-2022-618(D)]. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, who were informed of the study's purpose, voluntary nature, and their right to withdraw at any time without consequence.

Confidentiality was maintained through anonymized responses, secure data storage, and exclusion of personally identifiable information. Although participants engaged in a group setting, they were advised not to disclose personal information, and all contributions were treated with strict confidentiality. Although the HR department facilitated logistics, they did not access any participant data or information provided during the research.

To minimize power imbalances, direct reports and supervisors were excluded, and cultural sensitivity was prioritized through the inclusion of locally relevant wellbeing constructs. The study also complied with South Africa's data protection regulations (as governed by the Protection of Personal Information Act), ensuring transparency, data security, and participant privacy.

The relationship as a wellbeing enhancer was marked as the most important construct to be included in the training programme. Participants watched the TED Talk by Robert Waldinger about Harvard's adult development study. Most of the participants strongly supported this construct, as shown in the following quotes:

The trainer shared multiple excerpts from Keep Sharp: Build a Better Brain at Any Age by author Sanjay Gupta regarding sleep, nutrition, and exercise. A TED Talk by Matthew Walker and Wendy Suzuki was also shared with participants to emphasize sleep and exercise. This is what participants had to say regarding this:

The following section includes participant feedback on the inclusion of mindfulness, gratitude, and savoring as key constructs in the wellbeing training programme. These comments reflect participants' perspectives on how each practice could manage stress and enhance happiness and wellbeing.

This section explores the role of forgiveness and optimism as essential constructs for enhancing wellbeing. Participants discussed the emotional benefits of letting go of resentment and adopting a positive outlook on life. Drawing on concepts like Christian teachings, the REACH model of forgiveness, and Seligman's work on learned helplessness, participants reflected on how these practices could help build resilience and foster a more constructive mindset. Their insights highlight the transformative power of forgiveness and optimism in personal growth and emotional wellbeing.

The following comments capture participants' reflections on the concepts of character strengths and job crafting after viewing two YouTube videos about job crafting and character strengths. These insights emphasize how aligning individual strengths with job roles can enhance personal happiness and work engagement.

After viewing Emily Esfahani Smith's TED Talk, participants shared their thoughts on the importance of having meaning in life. These insights underscore how cultivating purpose, connection, and a sense of contribution can create a more resilient and fulfilling approach to personal wellbeing. The following comments reflect participants' views on this:

The Enhance wellbeing programme by Kushlev et al. (2017) followed a top-down, theory-driven structure based on positive psychology, CBT, and empirical wellbeing science. It was built around 10 predefined constructs grouped under Core Self, Experiential Self, and Social Self, delivered across 12 weeks, followed by a 3-month maintenance phase. The programme's structure and content were fixed and universal applied equally across all participants. In contrast, ENGAGE adopted a bottom-up, participatory design. It began with an extensive literature review and introduced 25 wellbeing constructs to the participants in a pilot session. Employees then co-developed the final training content through focus group discussions and a voting process to shortlist the most relevant constructs, ensuring cultural fit and practical relevance. This participatory method allowed ENGAGE to reflect employees' lived realities, prioritizing constructs like relationships, physical health (nutrition, sleep, exercise), and meaning in life. While ENHANCE emphasized theoretical consistency and longitudinal structure, ENGAGE prioritized customization, cultural contextualization, and employee ownership, thereby bridging academic insights with workplace realities in diverse cultural settings. Key distinctions between the two programmes are summarized in Supplementary material 1.

Krekel et al.'s (2021) Exploring What Matters course is a manualized, community-based intervention led by lay volunteers, focused on broad life themes (e.g., kindness, meaning) across eight weekly sessions. ENGAGE, by contrast, is workplace-centered, tailored to corporate contexts and delivered in a single-day (or modular) format by HR, with constructs selected directly by employees for their job-related relevance (e.g., job crafting, workplace relationships). Both share a goal of scalable wellbeing enhancement, but ENGAGE's co-design ensures greater contextual specificity. Key distinctions between the two programmes are summarized in Supplementary material 2.

The Inspired Life Programme by Appiah et al. (2021) was developed via community-based participatory research for rural Ghanaian adults, delivered weekly by trained psychology graduates, and embedded within the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework with small token incentives. ENGAGE similarly blends theory and participation but is designed for corporate professionals, led by HR, and uses employee-driven construct selection rather than community feedback via thematic mapping. While both emphasize cultural adaptation and skill building, ENGAGE prioritizes workplace applicability and voluntary, incentive-free engagement. Key distinctions between the two programmes are summarized in Supplementary material 3.

Happify offers a fully digital, self-guided platform combining positive psychology, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), with users receiving small monetary incentives for assessments (Parks et al., 2018). ENGAGE can be delivered in a hybrid in-person/online format facilitated by HR trainers. ENGAGE uses participant-voted constructs instead of algorithmic “tracks,” and foregoes financial incentives in favor of intrinsic, workplace-driven motivation. Both demonstrate scalable, evidence-based approaches, but ENGAGE's human facilitation and participatory ethos distinguish its contextual depth. Key distinctions between the two programmes are summarized in Supplementary material 4.