Making Wellness Work in 2026: How HR Leaders Can Drive Utilization, Engagement, and Real Impact

Most organizations aren’t short on wellness offerings. They’re short on wellness that actually lands—early enough to change outcomes.

A recent Gallagher LinkedIn article makes the case that employers are spending more, yet engagement and outcomes often stall—and that the answer is a more proactive, integrated “whole person” strategy. (LinkedIn) I agree. And I’d add one operational layer that often explains the disconnect:

Many organizations don’t have a benefits problem. They have a utilization-to-impact gap.
And coaching—done well—often becomes the missing execution bridge between “support exists” and “support changes daily reality.”

Why wellness can feel harder in 2026 (even with strong benefits)

HR leaders are navigating rising complexity across work, life, and health—and sustained cost pressure at the same time.

• Burnout levels remain high. For example, Robert Half reported 47% of Canadian workers feeling burned out in a national survey (2025). (Robert Half Canada)
• Benefits costs are also a dominant pressure point. Benefits Canada reported a WTW survey finding that 73% of Canadian employers said rising benefits costs were the #1 issue influencing their benefits strategy in 2025. (Benefits Canada.com)

So the question becomes less “What else should we add?” and more:

How do we ensure the supports we already have are used, trusted, and effective—before issues escalate into absence, disability, safety risk, or turnover?

Two lanes HR is expected to manage (and both matter)

Lane 1: Individual supports

The “front door” resources—EFAP/EAP, coaching, clinical services through extended health, education/webinars, platforms and tools.

Lane 2: Psychosocial risk + work design

Workload, staffing, role clarity, psychological safety, manager capability, change saturation.

Wellness initiatives can’t fix Lane 2 alone—but they can be designed to work better in the reality of Lane 2 by lowering barriers and increasing early, practical uptake.

The utilization gap: why great benefits underperform

Utilization typically breaks down in four predictable places:

1. Awareness: “I didn’t know that was included.”
2. Applicability: “This isn’t for people like me / my role / my schedule.”
3. Trust: “I don’t want this to reflect on me.” (stigma + confidentiality fears)
4. Friction: “It’s complicated / slow / time-consuming.”

Even one of these is enough to stall use.

And this isn’t theoretical. A Canadian report on EAP access and use found many people misunderstand what EAPs are for, and cited concerns like perceived effectiveness and confidentiality as barriers. (Mental Health Research Canada) Separately, WTW highlights how essential confidentiality clarity is to encouraging EAP uptake. (WTW)

Key idea: Underuse usually isn’t a motivation problem. It’s often a design problem.

What HR can influence without adding spend

The most effective improvements often don’t require new budget. They require tightening how people find, trust, and use what already exists.

1) Clarify the “front door”

When people are stressed, too many choices create decision fatigue. A single “Start here” entry point increases follow-through.

2) Reduce uncertainty

People hesitate when they don’t know what happens next:

• What is session one like?
• How long does this take?
• What will I leave with?
• What’s private vs shared?

3) Use inclusive, non-stigmatizing language

If support is framed as “for people in crisis,” many employees won’t see themselves in it. Practical language—sleep, energy, stress load, routines, confidence—invites earlier entry.

4) Match supports to real life-stage needs

Generic wellness can feel irrelevant. Life-stage framing makes it real: leadership strain, midlife/menopause, caregiving, chronic condition management, shift work realities.

5) Make access feel fast, simple, and safe

When capacity is low, friction becomes a deal-breaker. The first step has to feel easy.

Practical friction removers (examples you can copy)

• One front door: a single page/link that routes employees to the right support (EAP counselling vs coaching vs RD pathway).
• Time permission (where feasible): leaders normalize using supports during the workday (“Book it—no explanation required”).
• Confidentiality clarity: repeat 2–3 plain-language sentences often (and align them to your vendor reporting terms). (WTW)
• Micro-commitment entry: “Try one session” beats “join a program.”

Where coaching fits relative to EFAP/EAP and benefits

Here’s the simplest way to explain it:

• EFAP/EAP = urgent support, counselling, navigation, conflict/crisis support, clinical referral pathways
• Extended health benefits = regulated clinical services (psychologist, registered dietitian, physio) with annual limits + variable access
• Coaching = the execution bridge: behaviour change + habit-building + follow-through, often before issues escalate and after education alone stalls

This “execution bridge” matters because timing matters. The earlier employees can access practical support, the less likely issues compound into high-cost outcomes later.

“But we already have coaching in our EAP”

Many Canadian EAP contracts include some wellness coaching and sometimes nutrition support. The issue is often not “is it included?” but:

Is it clear, used, and deep enough to change outcomes?

Where coaching programs tend to deliver more impact is when they include:

1. Activation (turns “included” into “used”)
   Clear routing, reduced uncertainty, micro-commitment entry, and consistent confidentiality messaging.
2. Depth + continuity for real behaviour change
   Not just advice—structured habit-building and follow-through across sessions, matched to real constraints.
3. Specialized pathways where general coaching can stall
   Examples: leadership vitality, midlife/menopause, chronic disease/GLP-1 support—paired with scope-aligned escalation back to EFAP counselling when needed.
4. RD-led nutrition where it matters
   Especially when cardiometabolic risk or chronic conditions are part of the picture, with clear scope boundaries.
5. Employer-ready measurement (aggregate only)
   A coaching-specific scoreboard: time-to-first-appointment, completion rates, and simple pre/post self-report measures (stress, sleep, energy, confidence/functioning).

Measure impact rather than assume ROI

It’s tempting to promise ROI. A more credible line is:

“This is designed to improve utilization and outcomes from existing benefit investments. We measure impact rather than assume it.”

If you want a simple evaluation frame for pilots, use a RE-AIM-style lens: reach, engagement, and practical outcomes.

Two next steps you can take this month

1. Clarify your front door.
   Make it obvious where to start—and what each option is for.
2. Remove one barrier.
   Reduce steps, normalize usage, increase relevance, or build trust with better confidentiality clarity.

Because in 2026, the strategic advantage isn’t just a bigger menu of benefits—it’s a system people actually use.

Author: Emma Carpenter

President and Workplace Wellness Strategist, BSC, Health Promotion