§ Loading
§ Loading
Someone in your organization may be navigating a hard time at work. Point them here . If they’re in crisis, call 988 .
For VP+ People, HR, Total Rewards, OHS, and Safety leaders responsible for Canadian workforce health, disability costs, and the structural conditions that drive both. Every claim cites its source by author and year — free to read, and free to cite in a board paper.
No third-party tracking · free to cite
Edited by Meagan Angelucci · CDMP
12 publications · 3 industry analyses
CSA Z1003 + Z1011:20 aligned
CC BY-SA 4.0
Every figure on this page names its source. You shouldn’t have to trust us — you should be able to check, then cite it yourself.
The climate that predicts whether workers report harm, ask for accommodation, and stay through difficult periods. Measured at the team level with ICC-validated instruments, not the sentiment an engagement survey captures.
LeBreton & Senter, 2008
See the evidenceWhere the organization sits against CSA Z1011:20, Canada’s national standard for work disability management systems: governance, intake, communication, return-to-work coordination, accommodation, dispute resolution, outcomes.
CSA Group, 2020 (Z1011:20)
Read the standardWhere the organization sits against CSA Z1003, Canada’s national standard for psychological health and safety at work. Thirteen psychosocial factors, all treated as measurable workplace properties.
CSA Group, 2013 (Z1003)
Read the standardThese are the conditions a workforce-health investment actually moves — not engagement scores, and not individual resilience. The evidence below is the strategic-layer subset of the library, ordered for the person deciding where the budget goes.
Six of the twelve in the library, picked for the person setting policy and allocating budget. Each links to the full publication, and each carries a GRADE dot showing how strong the underlying evidence is — see the methodology page for what the dots mean.
| NO | TITLE | TYPE | GRADE | WHY IT MATTERS AT YOUR LAYER |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 2026 Canadian Workplace Culture Trends Report | INDUSTRY ANALYSIS | MODERATE | The annual map of where Canadian workforce health sits right now. |
| 02 | Why Engagement Surveys Don't Measure What Matters | EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS | STRONG | The case for moving measurement budget from sentiment to structural conditions. |
| 03 | Disability case management framework (697 studies) | EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS | STRONG | The evidence base for a coordinated approach to disability management at scale. |
| 04 | I/O Practices in Canadian Insurance | INDUSTRY ANALYSIS | MODERATE | Sector-specific data for benefits and insurance leadership. |
| 05 | The Diversity Measurement Gap in Canadian Benefits | INDUSTRY ANALYSIS | MODERATE | The structural-data gap most organizations don't yet know they have. |
| 06 | After the Scandal: Rebuilding Ethical Culture | EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS | MODERATE | What the evidence says about rebuilding culture after an incident. |
Canada’s national standard for workplace psychological health. Thirteen psychosocial factors, treated as measurable workplace properties rather than climate sentiment. The lab’s measurement work aligns to this standard.
Canada’s national standard for organizational disability management. System-level requirements for governance, intake, communication, return-to-work coordination, accommodation, dispute resolution, and outcome measurement.
The international consensus framework for grading how certain the evidence behind a claim is. Every publication on this site carries a GRADE dot so you can see the strength before you cite it.
Evidence-based training built on the same cite-or-refuse standard as the research, delivered through LearnWorlds. The programs are in active redesign right now — here’s what they cover and who they’re for.
People managers and team leaders
Supervisors, HR, and disability-management practitioners
Supervisors and practitioners managing return-to-work cases
The full research library plus the lab’s frameworks — the A.R.T. framework (Acknowledge / Reclaim / Thrive), the 20-factor RTW Complexity Risk Model, and the Masking at Work Scale — are free to read and reuse today under CC BY-SA 4.0.
EDITED BY MEAGAN ANGELUCCI · I/O PSYCHOLOGY PRACTITIONER · CDMP, MS I/O PSYCHOLOGY