The impact of loneliness upon businesses across the UK
Juliet Michaelson, Karen Jeffrey, Saamah Abdallah
20 February 2017
The research finds that loneliness experienced in the UK represents a significant cost to UK employers, both via its impacts on the health of employees and those they care for, and via its impacts on employee wellbeing and thus on productivity and staff turnover.
In the past decade, loneliness has increasingly come to be regarded as a serious issue affecting wellbeing, health, and a range of other outcomes. Loneliness is a related, but distinct concept from social isolation, focusing on how people feel about their contact with other people. Whilst many people may experience loneliness from time to time, when individuals feel lonely most, or all of the time, the implications in terms of wellbeing and health can be serious. Our focus in this study is on this form of ‘extreme’ loneliness.
While loneliness is often discussed as an issue relating to older people, studies have shown that loneliness can and does affect people across all age groups. A conservative estimate suggests just over 1 million workers experience loneliness in the UK.
To estimate the costs of loneliness to employers, we have consulted the published academic literature which examines the relationships between loneliness and wellbeing and health outcomes, as well as studies which examine the associations between these wellbeing and health outcomes and impacts on employers. We have also used published national statistics on aspects of employment to produce the costs of these impacts.
We have brought this evidence together in a person-centred impact model quantifying the annual costs to employers of loneliness. The model takes a prevalence-based approach, looking at all cases of loneliness in the relevant populations. It comprises four key pathways:
The costs from these four pathways produce a total cost to UK employers from loneliness of £2.5 billion per year, which includes £2.1 billion to employers in the private sector.
This result represents a conservative estimate because we have chosen the most conservative assumptions in our model at all relevant decision points.
It is notable that 10% of the total costs are derived from the pathways relating to the impact of loneliness on health, compared to 90% from the pathways related to wellbeing. There are several reasons why the costs of the pathways via health are lower than those via wellbeing. First, the model was limited to looking at those health conditions with only the most robust evidence linking them to loneliness, with future research likely to shed much more light on these relationships. Second, many of the costs of health impacts are borne by the state, rather than by employers, especially for chronic conditions that can be managed with medication. And third, while substantial sickness and caring absence because of loneliness will only affect a small number of employees, the impacts of loneliness on reduced wellbeing and therefore on productivity and voluntary turnover will affect a much larger pool of people.
Our findings of substantial costs from loneliness to UK employers strongly suggest that it is in their interests to take both reactive and preventative approaches to minimise the loneliness of their employees. A key first step will be raising awareness of the issue among employers, so that they understand the business case for addressing loneliness among their employees. This could usefully be linked to the wider evidence on the impact employers can have on overall employee wellbeing, and the ways in which the workplace can act as a positive support for overall wellbeing, and employees’ levels of social support.
If you value great public services, protecting the planet and reducing inequality, please support NEF today.
Why the first-ever COP Health Day should aim for health equity and enshrine the principle and goal of a fair transition
01 December 2023
Loophole in energy profits levy will hand oil and gas companies up to £18bn over next three years
28 November 2023
Dampening further property speculation in the housing crisis
Alex Diner, Sam Tims
23 November 2023
A universal basic services approach to early childhood education and care
Tom Pollard, Anna Coote, Jeevun Sandher, Tom Stephens, Harry Ewart-Biggs
20 November 2023