For employers
An independent, Ph.D.-level evaluation of a program, benefit, training, technology, or organizational change meant to affect employees’ mental health, wellbeing, or their functioning at work (productivity, absence, turnover, etc.).
The stakes
Organizations invest in benefits, programs, training, technologies, and organizational changes without strong evidence that these initiatives produced their intended effects. They either never evaluate them or rely on generic employee surveys from their human resources (HR) department or the company that sold the initiative in the first place.
There is a second problem when the company selling the initiative also evaluates it: there is an inherent conflict of interest. The evaluator benefits from showing that the initiative worked.
Generic employee surveys can tell you how employees are doing. But without evaluating the initiative itself using rigorous research methods, you cannot confidently determine whether it worked, by how much, for whom, under what conditions, or what to do next.
When the evidence is weak and potentially biased, decision-makers are left unsure whether the money is actually creating value. A consequential investment should not rest on weak or biased evidence.
You scale an initiative that produces little meaningful benefit.
You keep paying for a service that is not worth the cost.
You miss the chance to modify one that works only under certain conditions.
Weak evidence can justify a costly commitment you never needed.
The outcome
You will learn whether it works, by how much, for whom, and under what conditions. You will use that evidence to decide whether to scale, modify, renew, replace, or discontinue.
From consequential decisions made with weak or biased evidence.
To decisions made with strong, independent evidence.
The evaluator
Alexandre Lemyre has a Ph.D. in psychology from Université Laval and completed a three-year postdoctoral fellowship at Université de Montréal. He will design and conduct a custom research project around your initiative, using rigorous research methods to determine whether it produces its intended effects. Because he does not sell the initiatives he evaluates, he has no financial interest in whether the results are positive or negative.
10 years designing and running studies from start to finish
21 peer-reviewed scientific articles
The plan
You clarify what the initiative is supposed to achieve, what would count as success, and the decision you need to make about it.
A rigorous research project determines whether the initiative worked, by how much, for whom, and under what conditions.
You receive a scientific report and an executive presentation showing what the evaluation found.
The work
Your evaluation is a custom research project built around the initiative you need to assess.
The evaluation focuses on the changes the initiative is intended to produce. Depending on the initiative, it can combine validated questionnaires, open-ended questions, focus groups, utilization information, and organizational records such as absenteeism, disability, or turnover.
Employees can improve or struggle for many reasons unrelated to an initiative. Where possible, the evaluation compares groups and accounts for other factors that could explain the changes, helping determine whether the initiative was actually responsible for these changes.
Knowing whether an initiative worked is only part of the picture. The analyses can help explain the mechanisms through which the initiative produced change, why it worked better in some individuals than others, identify barriers that limited its impact, and show which parts were most useful.
Questions
Any workplace initiative that aims to improve employee mental health, wellbeing, or functioning at work (productivity, absence, turnover, etc.) can be evaluated. Examples include employee benefits and EAPs, training programs, digital tools, mental-health services, and organizational changes such as new policies, restructuring, or changes to how work is organized.
Employee responses are handled confidentially. Employees are told what information will be collected and how it will be used, participation is voluntary, and the organization receives findings in aggregate rather than individual responses. When health or psychological information is collected, it is limited to what the evaluation requires. All information collected is protected through access, storage, and security safeguards suited to its sensitivity.
No. The evaluation is conducted for your organization, and the report belongs to you. The purpose is to support your decision-making, not to produce an academic publication.
Next step
The first conversation focuses on an upcoming decision about whether to launch, scale, renew, modify, replace, or discontinue a workplace initiative. It covers what the initiative involves, what you hope to achieve, and whether an independent evaluation makes sense.
If there is a good fit, the conversation can then turn to what the evaluation would involve.