POLARISKWorkforce Psychosocial Risk & Wellbeing Platform

Combined assessment report · Sample

Where the work is quietly costing you people, and what to do about it.

A board-ready read of psychosocial risk (the Assessment) and workforce wellbeing (Pulse) for one cycle. The Assessment finds the hazards in how the work is designed. Pulse measures whether wellbeing actually rises once you act.

Prepared for

Cascade Components, Inc.

Cycle

Q2 2026

Workforce

1,420 employees · 3 sites

Prepared by Dr Kirath Sidhu
Occupational health doctor · Reviewed and signed
Decision-support. Requires practitioner interpretation and sign-off before issue.

SAMPLE

Polarisk · Cascade Components, Inc.

Q2 2026 · Executive summary

Executive summary

Two numbers your board should see together

Psychosocial risk and wellbeing are the same story told from two ends. The first number says how much risk is built into the work today. The second says how your people are actually doing. Read on their own, each is easy to wave away. Read together, they point at the same short list of fixes.

Assessment · Psychosocial risk index

48 /100 High

8 of 12 ISO 45003 domains sit in the High or Extreme band. The load is concentrated in how the work is designed, not in the people doing it.

Polarisk · Wellbeing index

54 /100 At risk

Down 3 points across the last year. The psychosocial domain (40% of the index, fed from the Assessment) is the part dragging it down.

What this is costing, illustratively

~$5M to $9M a year

At 1,420 staff and a voluntary-turnover rate near 18%, replacement cost alone runs in this range (Gallup puts replacement at 0.5 to 2 times salary). People who report low psychological safety are more than twice as likely to be job-hunting within the year (APA: 41% versus 19%). The domains flagged below are the part of that number you can design out, rather than back-fill with hiring.

What stands out this cycle

Finding	Read	Signal
Workload & work pace	78% report it unfavourably. The clearest single driver of the index.	Extreme
Hours & work–life balance	Shift patterns and after-hours contact are eroding recovery time.	Extreme
Job & career security	Uncertainty after the site consolidation is reading as chronic stress.	Extreme
Civility & respect	Lower prevalence, but high harm potential. Worth a focused look on the floor.	High
Engineering & Admin	Both sit in the Healthy band. Useful internal proof that the model is fixable.	Healthy

This report is management information about groups, never a clinical assessment of any individual. It is not medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Findings are decision-support and require qualified practitioner interpretation and sign-off before they are acted on or shared.

Polarisk · Combined Assessment Report (Sample)Cascade Components, Inc. · Q2 2026

Polarisk · Psychosocial Risk Assessment

ISO 45003 · Likelihood × Severity

Assessment · Protection layer

The risk map your auditors expect

Every ISO 45003 psychosocial domain plotted on the 5×5 grid. Position is driven by how many staff report the issue (likelihood) and its inherent harm potential (severity). The same artefact an HSE or ISO 45001 assessor will ask to see, produced from this cycle's survey rather than a workshop guess.

1

Rare

2

Unlikely

3

Possible

4

Likely

5

Almost certain

5Severe

Emotional demands

Civility & respect

4Major

Manager supportPsych. safety

WorkloadHoursJob security

3Serious

ControlRole clarityRecognitionLeadership

Org. change

2Moderate

1Minor

Likelihood → (share of workforce reporting unfavourably)

LowModerateHighExtreme

Plate I · Psychosocial risk map, Q2 2026 survey

Ranked exposure

Workload & work pace	78%	16
Hours & work–life	70%	16
Job & career security	64%	16
Civility & respect	44%	15
Org. change	62%	12
Manager support	48%	12
Psychological safety	60%	12

How to read it

Risk score is likelihood (1 to 5) multiplied by severity (1 to 5). Severity is pre-set per ISO 45003 and adjustable with a clinician's note. Anything in orange or red is a domain where the work, not the worker, is the thing to change first.

Polarisk · Combined Assessment Report (Sample)Assessment · ISO 45003 risk map

Assessment · Mitigation Plan

Hierarchy of controls

Assessment · what to actually do

Fix the work first, then support the worker

Controls are mapped to the hierarchy that ISO 45003 expects: redesign the hazard out before you add training, and add training before you lean on individual coping. Each priority below carries an owner, a timeframe, and the one number that says whether it worked.

P1 · Workload & work pace

Extreme · 16

Likely root causes. Headcount has not kept pace with order volume since the Q4 consolidation; deadlines are set against best-case capacity, not real capacity.

Eliminate

Cap concurrent priorities per line and re-sequence Q3 deadlines against demonstrated throughput, not target throughput.

Administrative

Add a workload-review checkpoint to weekly planning so overload is surfaced by supervisors before it shows up in the next survey.

Measure of success: reported workload pressure falls at least 15 points at the Q3 re-survey.

P2 · Hours & work–life balance

Extreme · 16

Likely root causes. Overtime is the default cover for absence, and after-hours messaging has become normal for salaried supervisors.

Substitute

Move from reactive overtime to a planned relief-crew rotation on the two lines carrying the most hours.

Administrative

Set and publish an after-hours contact norm for supervisors, with a clear exception path for genuine line-down events.

Measure of success: average weekly overtime hours on the two lines drop, with no offsetting rise in backlog.

P3 · Job & career security

Extreme · 16

Likely root causes. The consolidation was communicated as a one-off announcement, so the floor has filled the silence since with worst-case assumptions.

Engineering

Stand up a standing change-communication rhythm (monthly, named owner) covering staffing and site plans for the next two quarters.

Support

Offer a clear internal redeployment and skills pathway so security reads as a route forward, not a coin flip.

Measure of success: the share reporting security unfavourably falls below 45% next cycle.

P4 · Civility & respect

High · 15

Likely root causes. Lower prevalence than the workload items, but high harm potential, and concentrated on specific shifts rather than spread evenly.

Eliminate

Publish a plain conduct standard with a confidential reporting route, and act visibly on the first cases so it is seen to mean something.

Administrative

Equip shift leads to handle incivility consistently, so outcomes do not depend on who is on that night.

Measure of success: civility scores improve and time-to-resolution on reports comes down.

Polarisk · Combined Assessment Report (Sample)Assessment · Mitigation plan

Polarisk · Workforce Wellbeing Index

Promotion & measurement layer

Polarisk · is it actually getting better

The index that proves the fixes worked

The Assessment tells you what to change. Pulse tells you whether changing it moved anything. One 0 to 100 index, built from validated domains, with the psychosocial domain fed straight from the Assessment so the two modes stay one story.

Wellbeing index · Q2 2026

At risk

Down from 57 a year ago. The slope matters more than the number: this is the baseline you will measure the mitigation plan against.

Index over the last four cycles

Fig. 1 · Wellbeing index by cycle

What the index is made of

Higher is better. Weighted into the overall index.

Mental wellbeing (25%)

61

Work ability & energy (20%)

54

Lifestyle & rest (15%)

58

Psychosocial (40%, via the Assessment)

47

The psychosocial domain carries the most weight and scores the lowest. That is the link: the same work-design hazards the Assessment flagged are what is holding the wellbeing index down.

By department · Q2 2026

Team level only. Groups under 8 responses are hidden so no individual is identifiable.

Department	Responses	Index	Band
Engineering	110		60
Admin & Finance	40		63
Quality	90		56
Logistics	160		51
Operations	320		49
Maintenance	140		47
Site Leadership	6	Hidden · below the 8-response anonymity threshold

Polarisk · Combined Assessment Report (Sample)Polarisk · Wellbeing index

Polarisk · What happens next

The measurement loop

The one-platform logic

Assess, act, re-measure, and show the board the line moved

The reason psychosocial programmes get cut is that nobody can prove they worked. Polarisk closes that loop on purpose: the risk you find in the Assessment becomes the plan, the plan changes the work, and the next cycle shows whether the index moved. That is the difference between a wellbeing dashboard and a retention tool a CFO will keep funding.

01

Assess

12 ISO 45003 domains scored from the survey, plotted on the 5×5 matrix, ranked by risk.

02

Act (Mitigation plan)

Controls mapped to the hierarchy, each with an owner, a timeframe, and a success measure.

03

Re-measure (Pulse)

Next cycle re-runs the index and shows the movement against this baseline, by team and by domain.

Recommended cadence

Now	Baseline (this report). Share the four priorities with the owners named in the plan.
0–3 mo	Workload and hours controls land first. They move the index most.
Q3 2026	Pulse re-survey. Expect workload and hours to move before security and civility.
Q4 2026	Full cycle. Board read on the line, plus the ESG and human-capital export.

Why this is board-level now

US employers carry no psychosocial mandate, so this is not a compliance purchase. It is a liability, disclosure, and retention one. The SEC has moved human-capital information (turnover, health and safety) toward material disclosure, and investors are asking for workforce metrics. The Assessment gives you the risk picture; Pulse gives you the trend line to report against it.

Method & safeguards

Instruments. The Assessment scores 12 ISO 45003 psychosocial domains by likelihood (share reporting unfavourably) and severity (inherent harm potential). Pulse builds a 0 to 100 wellbeing index from mental wellbeing, work ability, lifestyle, and the psychosocial domain fed from the Assessment. Frameworks are mappable to ISO 45003, UK HSE, Safe Work Australia, and EU-OSHA.

Privacy. Results are reported at team or site level only. Any group under 5 responses is hidden to protect individuals. The platform holds no individual health records and produces management information, not diagnosis. Every report carries practitioner sign-off before issue.

Prepared by Dr Kirath Sidhu
Occupational health doctor · Reviewed and signed
Decision-support. Management information about groups, not individual medical advice. Requires practitioner interpretation and sign-off before issue.

SAMPLE

Polarisk · Combined Assessment Report (Sample)Cascade Components, Inc. · Q2 2026