Psychosocial hazards are a legal duty in more places every year, and good practice everywhere. Most organisations can run an evaluation (sometimes called a psychosocial risk survey). Far fewer can answer the question an inspector actually asks: which hazards, at what level, in which teams, and what did you do about it?
The same responses, presented through each framework's own structure. Switch lenses in the bank; where more than one applies to you, a switcher sits at the top of every hazards page so you can move between them.
The base view. Psychosocial hazards as the model WHS Regulations frame them, scored by team and by leader.
The international guidance on psychological health and safety at work, applied to the same dataset. It works in any country, whether or not local law requires it.
The Canadian National Standard, reported on its own thirteen factors and scored protectively, so higher is healthier.
The Five Essentials for Workplace Mental Health & Well-Being. The United States has no mandated standard, so this is the reference most US employers are measured against.
A group operating in Australia and Canada is answerable to both. A multinational with a US workforce is measured against a framework that is not law anywhere. Running a separate assessment for each is expensive, slow, and produces numbers that disagree with each other for no good reason.
One evaluation, reported four ways, gives every jurisdiction its own evidence from the same source. It also gives you one conversation with your board instead of four.
Identifying a hazard is the easy half. What an inspector asks for is what you did next. Directives raised while reviewing a report are recorded against it and travel with the export, so the trail from finding to action exists without anyone assembling it the week before an audit.
Scores are suppressed below a minimum response threshold, so a small team can never be identified from a hazard result. Nobody has to remember to switch it on. The reporting always works that way.
A national infrastructure services group assesses psychosocial hazards across its workforce on this platform, with its own risk-control library mapped to the Psychosocial Hierarchy of Control (eliminate, substitute, re-design, administrate, encourage), so each hazard is answered in the order the standards document them.
Tell us which standards you are held to and we will show you the same evaluation through each of them.