This summary provides evidence on the relationships between learning and development (L&D) and employee wellbeing, engagement, attraction and retention, to support decision-making on L&D in the UK civil service. The evidence is drawn from two sources: 

• Findings from the ‘Work, Learning and Wellbeing’ programme of research led by the University of East Anglia funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, which was part of the What Works Centre for Wellbeing programme of research.
• Findings from a new rapid review of reviews (a systematic process for performing a rapid high-quality check on what is known on a topic).
  It is important to find out how L&D can influence workplace wellbeing. There is an established link between employee wellbeing and organisational benefits such as improved performance, reduced costs and greater innovation (What Works Centre for Wellbeing, 2017). There are also legal and ethical reasons for pursuing better employee wellbeing in all organisations, including in the UK Civil Service which agreed to follow the recommendations of the Stevenson-Farmer review to improve the mental health of workers (Stevenson & Farmer, 2017), including appropriate training for all grades.

1. Existing evidence

From the ‘Work, Learning and Wellbeing’ programme we already know there is robust evidence that – in general – learning is good for wellbeing (Watson et al., 2017). Receiving over 24 hours of job-related training per year is associated with increases in life satisfaction for employees, but particularly younger people and people in deprived areas of England. Training is estimated to produce an effect on wellbeing equivalent to a 1% increase in pay (Tregaskis & Nandi, 2023). 

Training where employees learn how to make their own job better may have positive effects on wellbeing and in some cases may provide cost-effective performance improvements (Daniels, Gedikli, et al., 2017; Oprea et al., 2019). Context is important. The success of any activity aimed at improving workplace wellbeing is reliant on employees perceiving the activity as sustained, authentic, tailored, responsive and equitable (Daniels et al., 2022, Nayani et al., 2022).

Review of reviews findings
Different types of training and development can improve wellbeing-related outcomes:

• direct training for improving wellbeing and resilience (largely positive effects);
• leadership training (largely positive); and 
• professional capabilities training (more mixed findings) Watson et al. (2018). 

There are diverse types of training focussed on wellbeing – for example there are positive wellbeing-related outcomes from some empathy training and training in trauma-informed behaviours (Lajante et al., 2023, Purtle, 2020). Resilience training helps reduce stress, anxiety, burnout and biological markers of stress. Resilience training shows more mixed results for depression and performance (Brassington & Lomas, 2021; Lu & Petersen, 2023; Robertson et al., 2015). 

Three reviews mentioned attraction (Kaliannan et al. (2023); Milani et al., 2021; Xia, 2022) as being related to talent development and management – but no detail or insight was provided.

Three reviews linked sustained L&D opportunities to improved retention of employees (Milani et al., 2021, Shiri et al., 2023, Kaliannan et al. 2023). There is some evidence that L&D is a more important factor for employee retention among younger employees than older employees, but for both groups there are other important factors also at play (e.g. pay, workload, autonomy) (Shiri et al., 2023).

There are things L&D cannot achieve in isolation. A supportive context is key for successful L&D outcomes. (Arokiasamy et al., 2023; Brassington & Lomas, 2021; Kaliannan et al., 2023; Lajante et al., 2023; Mathias et al., 2021; Purtle, 2020; Watson et al., 2018). L&D targeted at individuals cannot be the sole way of improving organisational outcomes without complementary job design around sensible demands and resources, adequate organisational support, appropriate reward and a culture of recognition for learning and development (Brassington & Lomas, 2021; Mathias et al., 2021; Watson et al., 2018).

One of the key benefits of training may be rooted in opportunities for social interaction as solely online training is less effective for wellbeing (Watson et al., 2018). 

Mental health-related training comes with caveats. Certain approaches to resilience / mental-health-focussed training, may worsen outcomes rather than improve them. Specifically, people already experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder may require different training approaches than those who have not experienced it (Brassington & Lomas, 2021).

2. In conclusion

The findings of the review of reviews are based on the mix of high and lower quality studies available but can still be considered relevant and useful – they provide the best knowledge based on the type of studies currently available. 

Knowledge gaps appear to exist on the relationship between L&D and wellbeing and engagement outcomes for general employees (as opposed to managers or specific professions) and there is less evidence on general professional training than wellbeing-targeted training. There is a knowledge gap around the link between L&D and the attraction of employees. 

We aimed to identify if robust research was available that quantifies or provides financial proxies for the impact of L&D on wellbeing, engagement, retention or attraction. Very few of these ‘hard’ details were available at review level. The lack of quantification is a common finding in relation to research on workplace wellbeing overall – for example the 2022 NICE guidelines on mental wellbeing at work repeatedly call for more research on the cost-effectiveness of interventions (NICE, 2022). 

As a major employer, the UK Civil Service has the opportunity to improve the evidence base around L&D via high quality, cyclical evaluation and review practices. While these may be administered in-house for individual interventions and programmes, the exploration of combinations of practices, more robust trials and cost-effectiveness work may usefully draw upon external academic expertise.