Joining Occupational Safety and Workplace Health Promotion: What Prevents Integration

Overview

Occupational health and safety and workplace health promotion both aim to protect and improve worker wellbeing, yet they often operate separately. Safety teams typically focus on workplace hazards, legal duties and risk controls, while health-promotion activities may be managed by human resources, wellbeing teams, occupational health providers or external specialists.

This Australian qualitative study examines why these areas remain divided and what may help organisations create a more integrated approach to worker health, safety and wellbeing.

The researchers gathered the views of 47 participants, including occupational health and safety professionals, health-promotion practitioners, occupational health professionals and employers. Through interviews and focus groups conducted between October 2024 and March 2025, participants discussed how they understood integration, where it was already occurring and which barriers made collaboration difficult.

A major issue was the lack of shared professional knowledge. Some safety practitioners had limited understanding of health-promotion theory, programme design and evaluation, while health-promotion specialists could be unfamiliar with safety concepts such as hazard identification, occupational hygiene and the hierarchy of controls. Without a common language and understanding, teams can struggle to work effectively together.

Participants also questioned the value of health-promotion initiatives that focus heavily on individual behaviour. Programmes encouraging workers to become more resilient, exercise more or manage stress may provide support, but they can be ineffective if underlying problems such as excessive workload, poor supervision or badly designed work remain unchanged.

Organisational structure was another barrier. Safety, occupational health, human resources and wellbeing teams often operate with separate budgets, managers and priorities. COVID-19 demonstrated that closer cooperation was possible when organisations faced shared health challenges, but participants suggested this collaboration was not always maintained.

The study does not prove that integration reduces injuries or ill health. Instead, it identifies practical barriers that organisations may need to address if they want to develop a more coordinated approach to workforce health.

Methodology and Key Findings

Aim and Context

The study explored why Australian workplaces implement occupational health and safety and workplace health promotion separately or together, and what conditions may support greater integration.

Occupational health and safety primarily addresses risks created by work, while workplace health promotion can include health information, wellbeing initiatives, lifestyle programmes and organisational interventions. In practice, issues such as mental health, fatigue, musculoskeletal conditions and return to work may require input from both areas.

The research focused on implementation rather than effectiveness. It did not compare injury rates, sickness absence or health outcomes between integrated and non-integrated organisations.

Methodology

The researchers used a qualitative approach involving three online focus groups and 40 individual interviews. Five participants took part in both formats, resulting in a total sample of 47 people.

Participants were purposively recruited through professional networks, social media, word of mouth and professional newsletters. More than half were occupational health and safety professionals, with health-promotion practitioners, employers and occupational health professionals also represented.

Interviews generally lasted between 45 and 60 minutes, while focus groups lasted around one hour. Sessions were recorded, transcribed and analysed using reflective, inductive thematic analysis. NVivo 15 was used to organise the data.

The research was informed by the Knowledge to Action framework, previous survey findings and earlier research on occupational safety and workplace health promotion.

Key Finding 1: Professional Knowledge Remained Divided

Participants described limited understanding between disciplines.

Some safety professionals had little knowledge of health-promotion theory or evaluation, while health-promotion practitioners could lack familiarity with occupational risk-management concepts.

This made integration more difficult because teams did not always share the same terminology, priorities or understanding of employer responsibility.

The findings suggest that organisations may benefit from joint training and multidisciplinary planning rather than expecting each profession to work independently.

Key Finding 2: Health Promotion Must Address More Than Individual Behaviour

Participants were concerned that some workplace health initiatives concentrate too heavily on personal behaviour.

Wellbeing programmes may encourage workers to improve resilience, diet, exercise or stress management while leaving organisational causes of ill health unchanged.

The study suggests that health promotion should complement effective risk control rather than replace it. Employers should first address hazards and poor working conditions, then use health-promotion activities where they provide additional prevention or support.

Key Finding 3: Organisational Silos Restricted Collaboration

Different departments often had separate managers, budgets and performance measures.

This could lead to duplicated work, gaps in responsibility and inconsistent health messages.

COVID-19 temporarily encouraged closer cooperation between safety, occupational health, HR and wellbeing teams. Participants viewed this as evidence that integration was possible when organisations had a clear shared objective.

Integration does not necessarily require merging departments. It may instead involve common priorities, shared governance and agreed responsibilities.

Key Finding 4: Organisation Size Influenced Integration

Larger organisations were more likely to have specialist teams, formal systems and resources that could support integration.

However, they could also experience stronger departmental silos.

Smaller employers may have fewer internal divisions but often lack specialist expertise and may depend on external occupational health or safety support.

This suggests that integration should be adapted to the size, resources and capability of each organisation.

Key Finding 5: Management Support Was Essential

Participants described management understanding as an important influence on implementation.

Middle managers often controlled day-to-day working conditions, while senior leaders controlled resources and strategic priorities.

Integration was more difficult when managers did not understand how occupational safety, health promotion and occupational health could work together.

Clear proposals linking workplace risks, proposed action, expected outcomes and costs may help secure stronger management support.

Key Finding 6: Evaluation Remained Weak

Health-promotion programmes were often difficult to evaluate, particularly where benefits might take time to appear.

Participation or satisfaction measures alone do not show whether health has improved or workplace risks have been reduced.

The study suggests that evaluation should be planned from the start and could include hazard indicators, sickness absence, reported symptoms, staff retention, use of support services and employee feedback.

Takeaways for Practice

• Keep control of work-related hazards at the centre of any integrated programme.
• Give safety, occupational health, HR and wellbeing teams shared priorities.
• Build greater understanding between professional disciplines.
• Avoid programmes that place responsibility for poor working conditions on employees.
• Define outcomes before introducing health or wellbeing initiatives.
• Adapt integration to the organisation’s size and available resources.
• Give managers a clear explanation of the workplace problem, proposed action and expected result.

Read the Full Research Study Here:

Lu, Y., Karanikas, N., & Carroll, J.-A. (2026). Integrating occupational health and safety and health promotion: a qualitative study in Australia. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 37(2), e70173. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpja.70173