Can you afford not to invest in Human Skills?
A reflective resource for HR leaders looking to justify the training and development of their people.
One of the questions HR leaders find challenging to answer is:
“What’s the return on this investment?”
It’s a fair question. And one we hear less frequently than we used to – which tells us something important is changing. Many leaders now recognise that strong performance, resilience and adaptability depend on people skills, not just processes or policies.
And yet, when pressure increases or budgets tighten, investment in people can still feel harder to prioritise.
Not because leaders don’t care about their people. But because the ‘impact of not investing’ is often harder to see.
This resource is designed to help bring that impact into view – in a way that is human, grounded and commercially relevant.
What we know from experience and evidence
Beyond what HR professionals know intuitively, there is solid research showing that investing in people supports both wellbeing and performance.
One widely referenced study is Deloitte UK’s Mental Health and Employers Report (2024), which found that:
For every £1 invested in employee mental health and wellbeing, organisations see an average return of £4.70, through improved productivity, reduced absence and stronger retention.
And when you look at the cost of burnout, absenteeism and quiet-quitting on a human level, as well as economic level, the case for investment is strong.
This insight is based on evidence from multiple studies, and it aligns closely with what we see in practice. (We have further linked to a number of studies at the bottom of this resource.)
When we work with organisations, we partner with them to understand what matters to their business most and the problems they’re trying to solve.
We start by reviewing any data they have – (engagement surveys, absenteeism, attrition levels etc.) to look for a benchmark from which to measure. We then gather insights, sentiment and feedback from our training to demonstrate the impact and changes on capability, confidence, engagement and performance.
We also pay close attention to the learner experience. Our programmes are consistently rated 9 out of 10 for recommendation score, which matters because meaningful change only happens when people are genuinely engaged.
Even so, evidence on its own doesn’t always make decision-making easier. What’s often needed is a way to frame the conversation more clearly.
Why investment decisions can feel difficult
When leaders pause on investing in the human skills of their people, it’s rarely a question of values. More often, it’s because:
- The costs feel indirect
- The benefits feel longer term
- And the risks of not investing in human skills aren’t always named
The effects of stress, burnout, poor communication or underdeveloped leadership don’t usually appear as a single line on a spreadsheet.
Instead, they tend to show up gradually, through:
- Increased absence
- Disengagement that’s hard to spot
- Slower or more cautious decision-making
- Diminished creativity and problem-solving ability
- Reduced capacity during periods of change
- Loss of experience and knowledge through attrition
- Leaders spending more time responding than leading
- Team members withdrawing and/or feeling disconnected from each other
For HR, the challenge then becomes one of translation – connecting these lower level, more insidious effects with organisational risk, performance and sustainability.
The short assessment below is designed to support that conversation.
A reflective self-assessment for HR professionals and business leaders:
Score each self-perception question between 1 and 10. 1 = Strongly disagree and 10 = Strongly agree
Higher score = lower risk / stronger capability. A score below 6 for each individual question indicates elevated people-related performance risk.
Answer based on where you perceive your organisation is today, rather than where you would like it to be.
If you struggle to score any/all of the questions – this offers some important insight that an internal employee listening exercise* may help you to assess where your organisation currently stands.
Psychological Safety Index:
1. People feel safe (and encouraged) to speak up, feedback, challenge decisions and admit mistakes without fear of negative consequences.
2. Communication across the organisation is clear, timely and supports effective decision-making and execution.
3. Strong relationships, trust and inclusion are actively fostered across teams.
Why this matters: Organisations with high psychological safety see higher engagement, better decision-making, faster learning and stronger innovation – because people are willing to speak up, challenge and collaborate.
Human Leadership Index:
4. People in our organisation consistently go above and beyond their formal role to contribute, problem-solve and take ownership.
5. Our leaders and teams adapt effectively to change and uncertainty.
6. Leaders in our organisation are equipped to manage their own and their teams’ emotions, energy and performance under pressure.
Why this matters: Organisations with strong human leadership skills are more likely to experience more consistent performance and lower people-related risk – particularly under pressure and change.
Resilience Index:
7. People are generally able to manage pressure in a way that supports sustained performance rather than burnout.
8. A high proportion of our workforce is thriving – not just surviving.
9. We are able to retain critical talent and minimise unwanted attrition.
10. Based on our current people capability, I am confident organisational performance will improve over the next 12–24 months.
Why this matters: Organisations that sustain performance over time protect productivity, retain critical talent and avoid the hidden costs of burnout, disengagement and attrition.
Interpreting your combined scores:
If you scored between 80–100:
Your organisation already recognises that people play a central role in performance and business resilience/sustainability.
The question may be less about whether to invest, and more about whether current investment is well aligned with the demands your people are facing.
If you scored between 50–79
There may be areas where everyday friction – such as stress, disengagement, communication challenges or leadership capacity – is limiting performance.
Targeted development in human skills can often make a meaningful difference here.
If you scored below 50*
This may suggest that pressure is beginning to outweigh capacity in some areas.
Over time, this can increase the risk of burnout, attrition and inconsistent performance if left unaddressed.
Can I have a personalised report?
If you’re interested in a personalised report, you can take part in our Workforce Human Skills Assessment here.
Your anonymous data will go into a larger insights report to be published in April 2026.
Why all this matters from a leadership perspective
Human skills development is sometimes described as a ‘nice to have’, particularly when organisations are navigating competing priorities.
Looked at another way, it can also be seen as a way to:
- Support leaders to lead well under pressure
- Protect productivity during periods of change
- Sustain engagement and effort ‘above and beyond’ the job description
- Reduce avoidable loss of talent and experience
- Strengthen organisational resilience
This isn’t about doing more for people for its own sake. It’s about supporting the conditions in which people – and organisations – can perform well over time.
Investing in human skills is not separate from performance. It is part of how organisations care for, develop and protect the people they already rely on.
Continuing the conversation
If you would like to explore how these themes show up in your organisation, the POINT3 team would be pleased to talk and can support in the following ways:
- We can offer you a free employee listening survey*, to go alongside the self assessment tool shared above and here.
- Our Raise Your Human Game programmes are designed to strengthen the people skills measured in this diagnostic tool – particularly leadership under pressure, psychological safety and sustainable performance.
Further Resources to help answer the question of ROI
To follow, you will find links to respected research from Deloitte, Gallup, PwC and others that explore the relationship between people, wellbeing and performance:
- Employee Assistance Programmes (EAPs): £8 return for every £1 invested.
- Participants reported business benefits beyond financials, including engagement and retention.
- Finds that for every £1 spent on employee mental health and wellbeing support, employers receive about £4.70 back in increased productivity, reduced absenteeism and better retention.
- The ROI estimate comes from a review of 26 studies showing financial returns from wellbeing interventions.
- Report calculates that poor mental health costs UK employers £51 billion per year.
- Presenteeism (people at work but underperforming) is the largest contributor.
- While Gallup’s flagship report doesn’t provide a simple ROI ratio, it does quantify massive economic impact: disengagement cost the global economy $438 billion in lost productivity.
- Gallup’s research consistently shows highly engaged teams have significantly better business outcomes (e.g., reduced turnover, higher productivity, better profitability).
- Though not always presented as a simple ROI multiple, PwC’s analysis shows that investing in employee experience (incorporating wellbeing, training, autonomy, environment) can lead to up to 12.6% of revenue in “yield” through reduced absenteeism, turnover and improved productivity.