How to Measure Staff Wellbeing in a GP Practice

Measuring staff wellbeing in a GP practice involves gathering employee feedback, reviewing relevant workforce information and identifying patterns that may indicate problems with working conditions. The aim is to understand how staff experience their roles and whether workplace pressures are being managed effectively.

A structured staff survey can provide useful insight, but it should not be the only source of information. Sickness absence, staff turnover, workload patterns and everyday management conversations may help explain what employees are reporting.

For Practice Managers, the challenge is choosing measures that are relevant, proportionate and practical to maintain. A small practice does not necessarily need an extensive assessment programme. It needs reliable information that supports sensible management decisions.

Effective measurement should ultimately help practice leaders understand where difficulties exist, why they may be occurring and whether improvements are making a difference.

• What should a GP practice measure?

  A GP practice should measure the aspects of working life that influence employees' ability to carry out their responsibilities, manage demands and feel appropriately supported.

  Staff wellbeing is not a single characteristic. An employee may enjoy their work and have positive relationships with colleagues while struggling with an excessive workload. Another may have manageable duties but feel unable to approach management about concerns.

  These differences are important when deciding what information to collect.

  The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identifies six areas of work design associated with work-related stress: demands, control, support, relationships, role and change.

  These provide a useful starting point for assessing working conditions in general practice.

  • Workload and demands: Whether employees can manage their responsibilities within available working hours and resources.

  • Control over work: Whether staff have appropriate input into how their responsibilities are organised and prioritised.

  • Management and colleague support: Whether employees can obtain guidance, assistance and practical support when required.

  • Working relationships: Whether staff experience respectful communication and appropriate handling of workplace disagreements.

  • Role clarity: Whether employees understand their responsibilities, including boundaries between clinical and non-clinical duties.

  • Organisational change: Whether changes to staffing, systems and working arrangements are communicated and managed effectively.

  Practices may also wish to understand staff confidence in leadership, access to professional development and whether employees feel comfortable raising concerns.

  Not every practice needs to measure every possible aspect of wellbeing separately. The most useful measures will reflect the workforce and the issues management is trying to understand.

  For example, a practice experiencing difficulties with reception staffing may need to examine patient-facing pressure, breaks, training and workload distribution. A practice introducing new administrative processes may be more concerned with role clarity and the impact of change.

  The questions selected should have a clear management purpose.

• How can staff wellbeing surveys provide useful information?

  A GP practice staff survey provides a structured way to gather employees' views about their working experience. It can help managers identify recurring concerns, compare responses over time and understand issues that may not emerge through everyday conversations.

  Surveys are particularly useful when staff are reluctant to discuss sensitive matters directly with management.

  However, their effectiveness depends on how questions are designed and how the findings are interpreted.

  Questions should focus on specific aspects of the working environment rather than relying entirely on broad measures of happiness or job satisfaction.

  For example, asking whether an employee feels happy at work may provide a general indication of sentiment but offers limited information about what management could improve.

  More focused questions might include:

  • I have sufficient time to complete my routine responsibilities.

  • I understand what is expected of me in my role.

  • I can access support from management when necessary.

  • Changes affecting my work are communicated clearly.

  • I feel comfortable raising concerns about working arrangements.

  • I believe workplace concerns are taken seriously.

  • I have the equipment, information and training needed to perform my role.

  Employees could respond using a consistent agreement scale, alongside an opportunity to provide additional comments.

  This allows managers to examine particular aspects of staff experience without treating wellbeing as a single overall score.

  The HSE also provides a Management Standards Indicator Tool containing 35 questions about working conditions associated with work-related stress. Practices can consider whether this established approach, or another suitable method, meets their needs.

  There is no universal number of questions appropriate for every GP practice staff survey.

  A shorter questionnaire may be sufficient where management wants to examine a particular issue. A broader assessment may be more useful when establishing an initial understanding of working conditions.

  The important consideration is whether the questions produce information that can be meaningfully interpreted.

• What other workforce information should managers review?

  Staff surveys describe employees' experiences, but operational information can provide additional context.

  Most GP practices already hold workforce records that may be relevant to understanding working conditions. Reviewing these alongside employee feedback can help distinguish between temporary difficulties and problems requiring further attention.

  Useful sources include:

  Sickness absence

  Changes in absence patterns may warrant further consideration, particularly when employees have also raised concerns about workplace pressures.

  Absence information should be interpreted carefully. Individual health circumstances and seasonal illness can influence attendance, and absence rates alone cannot establish whether staff wellbeing is improving or deteriorating.

  Staff turnover and retention

  Frequent vacancies or difficulty retaining employees may justify reviewing role expectations, working arrangements and management practices.

  Exit discussions can provide additional insight, although staff may not always feel comfortable explaining their reasons for leaving.

  Overtime and additional working hours

  Regular overtime may indicate a mismatch between workload and available capacity.

  For example, administrative staff repeatedly remaining after their contracted hours to process correspondence could suggest that task volumes or working arrangements need reviewing.

  Workload and unfinished tasks

  Persistent backlogs, delayed processing and competing priorities may help identify operational pressures affecting staff.

  These measures should be interpreted in relation to demand, staffing levels and changes to practice processes.

  Workplace concerns and grievances

  Formal concerns may reveal issues requiring management attention. However, individual grievances should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of wider organisational problems.

  Confidentiality and appropriate employment procedures must be maintained.

  The purpose of reviewing workforce information is not to assign a wellbeing rating to individual employees.

  It is to establish whether wider patterns support concerns about how work is organised and managed.

• How can managers interpret the results accurately?

  Staff wellbeing data should be assessed through patterns, changes over time and the circumstances affecting the practice.

  An overall survey score may provide a useful summary, but it can conceal differences between areas of staff experience.

  Consider a practice where employees consistently report supportive colleagues and good relationships with management, but responses concerning workload are considerably less positive.

  The average result may appear satisfactory, while the workload findings suggest an issue requiring further investigation.

  Managers should therefore examine individual themes rather than relying entirely on a combined figure.

  Several questions can help when reviewing results:

  • Have particular concerns appeared in previous surveys?

  • Are responses changing following operational or staffing changes?

  • Do employee comments explain the findings?

  • Is there relevant operational information that supports or challenges the results?

  • Could unusually positive or negative findings reflect temporary circumstances?

  • Are there areas where further discussion would help establish the cause?

  Response rates also require attention.

  If only a small proportion of staff complete a survey, the findings may not adequately represent the wider workforce. Nevertheless, the concerns raised should not automatically be dismissed.

  Similarly, variation between staff groups can be useful to understand, but analysing very small teams may create confidentiality risks and unreliable comparisons.

  Practices should avoid inventing numerical thresholds to categorise employees or teams as having good or poor wellbeing unless the measurement approach uses established, validated thresholds.

  The most useful interpretation is one that identifies what requires further understanding rather than attempting to turn every response into a definitive judgement.

• How can a practice protect confidentiality when measuring wellbeing?

  Confidentiality is particularly important in general practice, where teams are often small and employees know one another's roles and working arrangements.

  An anonymous questionnaire does not necessarily guarantee that respondents cannot be identified.

  A combination of job title, working hours, length of service or written comments may reveal an individual's identity even where names are not requested.

  Practices should consider these risks when designing surveys and presenting findings.

  Appropriate safeguards may include:

  • Collecting only information needed for the stated purpose.

  • Avoiding unnecessary personal or demographic questions.

  • Restricting access to individual responses.

  • Reporting findings at a level that reduces identification risks.

  • Reviewing free-text comments before sharing summaries.

  • Explaining how information will be used and retained.

  • Providing separate confidential routes for individual employment or health concerns.

  Where responses contain personal data, relevant UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018 requirements apply.

  Information about an identifiable employee's physical or mental health may also constitute special category personal data, requiring additional safeguards.

  A wellbeing survey designed to understand working conditions should not unnecessarily collect employees' private medical information.

  Managers should also avoid attempting to determine who submitted particular anonymous comments.

  Trust in the feedback process is essential if employees are to provide meaningful information, particularly about sensitive workplace matters.

• How often should GP practices measure staff wellbeing?

  There is no single survey frequency that is appropriate for every GP practice.

  The most suitable approach depends on practice size, workforce circumstances, the purpose of measurement and management's capacity to review the findings.

  An annual survey may provide a useful broad assessment of working conditions, particularly when combined with regular staff conversations.

  Shorter surveys can be useful following significant changes, such as introducing a new appointment system, restructuring administrative responsibilities or altering staffing arrangements.

  However, frequent measurement is not automatically better.

  Repeatedly asking employees about the same concerns without allowing time for action can reduce confidence in the process.

  Practices should distinguish between different purposes:

  • Initial assessment: Establishing a baseline understanding of staff experience.

  • Periodic review: Identifying changes in working conditions over time.

  • Targeted assessment: Exploring concerns relating to a particular operational change or workplace issue.

  • Follow-up review: Establishing whether previous management action has improved the situation.

  Where comparisons over time are important, retaining consistent questions can make changes easier to interpret.

  Additional questions may be introduced when circumstances require them, but practices should avoid changing the entire measurement approach so frequently that meaningful comparisons become difficult.

  A manageable process that produces useful information is preferable to an extensive programme that cannot be maintained.

• What should happen after wellbeing has been measured?

  Measurement becomes valuable when the findings inform decisions about working conditions.

  Once information has been reviewed, Practice Managers should establish which issues require attention, whether further discussion is necessary and what action is reasonably achievable.

  For example, staff survey results might indicate that administrative employees frequently experience interruptions when completing time-sensitive work.

  Management could examine task allocation, communication arrangements and available capacity before deciding whether changes are appropriate.

  A practical process involves:

  • Identifying the most significant or recurring concerns.

  • Establishing whether the underlying causes are understood.

  • Discussing possible improvements with relevant staff and managers.

  • Agreeing actions, responsibilities and appropriate review dates.

  • Assessing whether the changes have improved the original situation.

  Not every concern will have a straightforward solution.

  Some workforce pressures arise from recruitment difficulties, financial constraints or wider NHS service demands. These may require GP partner involvement or longer-term operational decisions.

  Practice leaders should be clear about which matters can be addressed locally and which require escalation.

  Employees should also receive an appropriate summary of what the practice has learned and how management intends to respond.

  This does not require publishing individual survey responses or confidential employment information.

  It means demonstrating that the information collected has been considered and used constructively.

• How does measuring staff wellbeing relate to CQC?

  Workforce wellbeing information may contribute to a GP practice's understanding of its leadership, culture and governance arrangements.

  CQC's published assessment framework includes well-led quality statements concerning areas such as freedom to speak up, workforce equality, diversity and inclusion, and governance.

  For GP services, CQC identifies staff and leader feedback and organisational processes among relevant evidence categories.

  Structured workforce listening may therefore provide useful management insight and supporting evidence where it demonstrates how practice leaders understand and respond to staff concerns.

  However, CQC does not prescribe a particular commercial wellbeing survey or require practices to achieve a specified staff wellbeing score.

  Completing a survey is also not sufficient evidence, on its own, of effective leadership.

  Practices may find it useful to retain appropriate records showing:

  • Why workforce feedback was collected.

  • Which working conditions or concerns were examined.

  • How findings were reviewed by management.

  • What improvements were agreed.

  • Whether identified risks were addressed or escalated.

  • How the practice reviewed the effectiveness of its actions.

  Separately, employers have a legal duty to assess and manage work-related stress risks. Measuring staff wellbeing may support this work, but conducting a survey alone is not a substitute for an appropriate risk assessment.

  The distinction is between collecting workforce information and demonstrating effective management of the working environment.

• What should a Practice Manager check?

  Before introducing or reviewing a staff wellbeing measurement process, Practice Managers may find it useful to consider the following questions:

  • Is there a clear reason for measuring staff wellbeing?

  • Are the questions relevant to the working conditions employees experience?

  • Have clinical, reception, administrative and other relevant staff groups been appropriately considered?

  • Can employees provide feedback without unnecessary concerns about identification?

  • Are data protection and confidentiality arrangements suitable?

  • Is relevant workforce information available to help interpret the findings?

  • Can results be compared meaningfully with previous assessments?

  • Are findings being considered in the context of current operational pressures?

  • Is responsibility for reviewing results and agreeing actions clearly established?

  • Is there an appropriate process for assessing whether changes have been effective?

  These questions are a practical management aid rather than a prescribed national assessment standard.

  The objective is to establish a measurement process that is proportionate to the practice's needs and capable of supporting informed decisions.

• Common questions about measuring staff wellbeing

  Do GP practices need specialist software to measure staff wellbeing?

  No. Practices can collect and review feedback through a range of methods, including established survey tools, internal questionnaires and staff discussions. Specialist systems may help with administration, analysis and reporting, but they are not a general regulatory requirement.

  How many questions should a GP practice staff wellbeing survey contain?

  There is no universal number. The questionnaire should be long enough to cover the areas being assessed without collecting unnecessary information. Practices should consider whether an existing validated tool or a shorter targeted survey is most appropriate.

  Can sickness absence be used to measure wellbeing?

  Sickness absence can provide relevant workforce information, but it is not a direct measure of employee wellbeing. Patterns should be considered alongside staff feedback, operational circumstances and other appropriate evidence.

  Is an annual staff survey sufficient?

  An annual survey may be useful for reviewing workforce experience, but it should not replace everyday communication or appropriate responses to emerging concerns. The need for further measurement depends on the practice's circumstances.

  Does a high staff wellbeing score mean the practice has a healthy working environment?

  Not necessarily. A high overall score may conceal concerns about particular aspects of work or reflect responses from only part of the workforce. Results require interpretation and should be considered alongside other available information.

• A practical starting point

  GP practices do not need to begin with an extensive workforce measurement programme.

  For many, the most useful starting point is to identify what is already known about staff experience and where significant gaps remain.

  Practice leaders could begin by:

  1. Reviewing existing information. Consider previous employee feedback, relevant workforce patterns and any unresolved operational concerns.

  2. Selecting appropriate measures. Choose questions that examine working conditions relevant to the practice rather than collecting information without a clear purpose.

  3. Establishing a baseline. Gather feedback in a way that allows the practice to understand its current position and make appropriate comparisons later.

  4. Using the findings. Identify where action may be needed and involve the appropriate managers, partners or workforce representatives.

  5. Reviewing progress. Assess whether agreed changes have addressed the concerns identified and adjust the approach where necessary.

  Measuring staff wellbeing should help GP practices make better decisions about how work is organised and how employees are supported.

  The most useful result is not necessarily a high survey score. It is a clearer understanding of working conditions, supported by information that enables practice leaders to recognise concerns and respond appropriately.