With a clearly defined language, we gain clarity in addressing workplace stress as the mechanism of injury in response to psychosocial hazards. Workplace stress is not an emotional or behavioural issue, it is a systems problem with identifiable forces and measurable impacts.
Getting this language right isn’t merely an exercise in semantics, it shapes where organisations focus their attention, how they measure success, and how they protect their people and productivity.
Language matters
Stress is a universal human experience, an inevitable aspect of navigating life. In some cases, stress can drive personal growth and high performance. In others, it becomes debilitating and costly. With the introduction of psychosocial risk regulations, the concept of stress has been placed firmly on the organisational agenda.
However the language we use to talk about stress is often confused. As organisations embrace their responsibilities under evolving psychosocial regulatory frameworks, defining stress accurately and precisely becomes essential.
A Technical Lens on Stress
It’s helpful to briefly consider the technical origins of the term “stress”. In engineering, stress is a well-defined concept with a clear formula:
Stress (σ) = Force (F) /Area (A).
Stress is defined as the ratio of applied force acting upon the area of an object or material.
In this context:
- Force (F) represents external pressure/s or load/s applied to a material or object.
- Area (A) is the (structural) capacity resisting that force.
- Stress (σ) is the internal response or strain on the material or object produced by the force.
If the force exceeds the material’s capacity, it results in structural deformation or failure.
With thanks to the engineering toolbox for the reference.
Engineering Workplace Stress
This helps to clarify a framework for understanding psychosocial stress, or 'mental stress' as it appears in workers compensation data.
There is a clear distinction between the concept of:
- Stressor (Hazards) as the force of pressure/s which may be external (e.g., excessive workload, conflict, unclear expectations) or internal (e.g. health factors, thought processes).
- Stress as the reaction to these forces that arises when the pressures overwhelm the person’s capacity, with risk of psychosocial injury (e.g., fatigue, mood conditions).
So too, it is helpful to distinguish stress and strain.
- Strain can be defined as the 'sweet spot' tolerance window that provides the opportunity for personal growth and high performance. This is sometimes called eustress. We at Neuro at Work like strain or tension because these words clearly reflect the effortful, even challenging, nature with the distinction being the positive personal outcomes.
Implications for Psychosocial Risk Management
The distinction in language is not just conceptually valuable, it is operationally critical for psychosocial risk management. Clarity supports the early identification of escalating risk, enables focused intervention, and underpins effective evaluation and outcome measurement.
When the emphasis is placed on identifying and managing “stress” without clear definition, there is a real danger that assessment and intervention occurs only after strain has escalated to the point of dysfunction. And the evidence is clear: this kind of workplace stress is costly.
In action:
- Focus attention on identifying and managing the workplace forces, the hazards as stressor within the workplace.
- Measure stress derived from workplace stressors. Measurement assists to identify when stress escalates towards distress. Importantly, to identify workplace stress before a point of overwhelm or injury.
We welcome participating in obligation-free industry based collaboration and knowledge sharing in this space, let's connect.