Psychosocial risk assessment tools
There are many tools to help you manage psychosocial risks in your workplace. We've compared three of these so you can consider if one is right for your workplace.
Psychosocial hazards are aspects of work which have the potential to cause psychological or physical harm.
The Model Code of Practice: Managing psychosocial hazards at work identifies 14 psychosocial hazards.
Employers have responsibilities under WHS laws to adequately manage psychosocial hazards and risks in the workplace. There are a number of free and readily available tools to help employers manage potential risks.
Every organisation is different and the most appropriate tool for each organisation may depend on multiple factors including culture, structure and budget.
While these tools can help you understand more about the hazards in your workplace, assessment tools alone will not manage these risks. They are often a first step in a coordinated approach to managing psychosocial hazards.
Other important steps include securing senior management support, strong communication and consultation with workers, data analysis and interpretation, acting on the findings, and continually monitoring progress.
Comparison of psychosocial risk assessment tools
Use the table to decide which of the tools we've compared is most appropriate for your workplace.
| Tool | People at work | ADDRESS | Psychosocial safety climate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose | A step-by-step tool to identify and manage psychosocial risks in the workplace. | A model for responding to psychosocial hazards in the workplace – designed for use in the Australian Public Service. | A lead indicator question set to measure the organisational safety climate to prevent hazards from occurring. |
| Who would use the tool | HR and/or WHS managers | HR and/or WHS managers/general managers | HR and/or WHS managers |
| When would you use the tool | To measure the risk profile of the whole organisation, with the results broken down by team, location, and work level. | When conducting a deep dive into a known risk to develop mitigating actions. | When you are implementing an organisation-wide leading indicator framework to drive improved workplace culture. |
| Model Code of Practice - Hazard alignment | 12 of 14 | 14 of 14 | 0 of 14 |
| Areas of assessment |
|
|
|
| Methodology | 10 to15-minute survey via a dedicated platform | Self-assessment | 2 to 3-minute questionnaire |
| Suitability |
|
|
|
| Resources and support | Yes | Yes | No |
| Benchmarking | Yes - Australian workers (public and private) | No | Yes - Australian workers (public and private) |
| Participant identification | Anonymous | To be determined at time of implementation | To be determined at time of implementation |
| Data storage | Australia | To be determined at time of implementation | To be determined at time of implementation |
| Country of origin | Australia | Australia | Australia |
| Year of development | 2015 | 2023 | 2010 |
| Validated | Yes | No | Yes |
| Cost | Free | Free | License fee may be required |
| More information | Comcare | Australian Public Service Commission | University of South Australia Centre for Workplace Excellence |
Work health and safety regulators from across Australia have developed tailored tools for the organisations within their jurisdictions. Examples include the Psychosocial Risk Assessment Tool (QLD), the Healthy Workplace Toolkit (SA) and the Workplace Wellbeing Assessment tool (NSW).
Tips for selecting an appropriate tool
- Does the tool measure what is important to your organisation?
- What knowledge, skills and capacity are required to implement the tool effectively?
- What are the most important features for your organisation? For example, evidence-based, validated, benchmarked, cyber security, implementation support?
- The National Workplace Initiative (NWI) Measurement and Reporting Guides provide some considerations when selecting measurement tools for mentally healthy workplaces. The Guides can be found here:
