Search for information you're curious about
Bookmarks
All Posts
Hot
공지사항

Burnout & Work-Related Stress

When viewing job stress survey results and turnover/absence data together, is it okay to link them at the individual level?
2026.09.21 10:05
Views 31Scraps 3
Burnout and Job Stress

When viewing job stress survey results and turnover/absence data together, is it okay to link them at the individual level?

By examining job stress surveys together with turnover and absenteeism data, you can view the effectiveness of organizational improvements in a more multidimensional way. However, Directly linking individual scores with individual personnel records This is an area where the purpose of the investigation and personal information protection principles need to be reviewed.

short answer
If the purpose is general organizational improvement Aggregated analysis by department, job group, work type, and time period rather than individual connections We recommend doing this first. If personal-level analysis is absolutely necessary, please verify the purpose, legal basis, whether the information constitutes sensitive data, minimum collection, pseudonymization, and access permissions separately.

📌 First answer: If the goal is general organizational improvement, it is better not to start with individual-level connections.

When looking at job stress survey results together with turnover and absenteeism data, one might wonder whether high-stress employees actually resigned or were absent. However, if individual scores are directly linked to HR data, the survey responses Risk of transition to individual evaluation and personnel management This may increase, and respondent reliability may also decrease.

In practice, first Aggregation levels by department, job group, work type, and period It is safer to identify patterns and utilize them to improve the work environment within a scope where the possibility of personal identification is low. In particular, if job stress items can reveal physical or mental health conditions, sensitive information issues under the Personal Information Protection Act must also be reviewed.

🧭 Up to what level can we view together?

Analysis method Recommended for practical use Points to note
Company-wide stress trends + overall turnover and absenteeism rates height Low risk of personal identification and suitable for verifying organizational flow.
Department/Job Group Stress + Department Turnover/Absence Rates height Small organizations require minimum personnel standards due to the possibility of individual estimation.
Comparison by work type and job category Medium to high Determine the group size and the purpose of the analysis first.
Individual stress score + individual days of absence lowness Risk of direct combination of health/psychological information and HR information
Individual score + Resignation status + Evaluation/Performance Very low There is a high possibility that this will escalate into personal evaluations and judgments of disadvantage.
Analysis for statistical and research purposes after pseudonymization Conditionally possible Must meet requirements regarding the purpose, procedures, access control, and prohibition of re-identification of pseudonymization.

🔐 Why should you be more careful with person-to-person connections?

The Personal Information Protection Act requires that the purpose of processing personal information be clearly defined and that only the minimum amount of personal information necessary for that purpose be processed lawfully and justifiably. Furthermore, information regarding health is classified as sensitive information. If the questions and results of a job stress survey are structured to reveal specific psychological or health conditions, the processing of such information must be reviewed separately.

When HR data such as absenteeism, turnover, performance, evaluations, and disciplinary actions are combined, data originally intended for 'organizational improvement surveys' can be transformed into material for personal judgment. You must verify whether the purpose notified at the time of the initial survey aligns with the actual purpose of the combination and analysis, whether there is a separate legal basis, whether the data is minimal, and how access rights and retention periods will be handled.

📊 Analysis fully viewable without a personal connection

question How to view without a personal connection
Has turnover increased in high-stress departments? Comparison of departmental averages/distributions and departmental turnover rates over the same period
Does the workload issue move in tandem with absenteeism? Comparison of work requirement scores and monthly absenteeism rate trends by job group and organizational unit
Is the burden on shift workers high? Comparison of aggregate results by work type and trends in absenteeism and turnover
Have there been any changes since the improvement measures were taken? Comparison of Organizational Stress Indicators + Turnover and Absence Trends Before and After Improvement
Is there a problem with a specific manager organization? Review organizational-level recurring patterns and other indicators together while avoiding the identification of a few individuals.

👥 Individuals in small organizations may be visible even in 'counts'

In organizations with very small numbers, such as teams of five or fewer, or where there is only one resignation at a specific time, individuals can be easily identified even with 'department aggregation.' Therefore, instead of defining the unit of analysis simply by removing names, Group size, rare events, combination of rank, gender, and work type You must check up to that point and verify the possibility of re-identification.

Operational Example
If the department has a small number of personnel, you can reduce the possibility of individual overestimation by grouping similar job functions, analyzing data on a quarterly or semi-annual basis instead of monthly, or establishing minimum staffing standards. Please determine the specific minimum staffing standard based on the characteristics of the investigation, the size of the organization, and internal personal information protection standards.

🧪 If you really need an individual level analysis, please double-check your purpose first.

For example, if the purpose is 'organizational-level statistics and research,' you may consider the pseudonymized information system under the Personal Information Protection Act. The Act permits the processing of pseudonymized information under certain conditions for statistical compilation, scientific research, and public interest record keeping. However, pseudonymization differs from simply erasing names and requires separate management measures, such as the separation of additional information, access control, and the prohibition of re-identification.

Conversely, if the purpose is to 'identify who has high stress levels and frequent absenteeism and report them to managers,' you must first review whether the purpose itself is necessary and whether there is a risk of causing disadvantage to employees, rather than implementing a pseudonymization system.

✅ Pre-analysis Checklist

Confirmation items check
We verified whether the original purpose of collecting the investigation results and the purpose of the combined analysis were consistent. □
We reviewed whether individual analysis was truly necessary or if it could be replaced by organizational-level analysis. □
We reviewed the possibility that job stress results constitute health-related sensitive information. □
We confirmed the legal basis and scope for combining HR data, such as absenteeism, turnover, and performance. □
Use only the minimum necessary variables. □
We verified whether the aggregation units, such as departments and job groups, were at a level where individuals could not be estimated. □
The permissions of the analyst and the results viewer were restricted. □
If pseudonymization analysis is required, separate procedures and re-identification prohibition standards are applied. □
A principle was established not to use it directly as a basis for the evaluation, placement, or disciplinary action of individual employees. □
Criteria for retention and destruction were established after the purpose of the analysis was completed. □

⚠️ Operations to particularly avoid

  • A method of combining the list of employees at high risk of job stress and recent absentees and delivering it to the team leader.
  • Method of including individual scores in decision-making materials for promotion, placement, and performance evaluation
  • A method of extending the results for personnel purposes that was not disclosed at the time of the investigation
  • An analysis that effectively allows for easy identification of an individual by removing only the name while leaving the employee number, job title, team, and work type.
  • A method of widely storing analysis files on general HR shared drives

💬 The same principles apply as with EAP data.

Caution is also required when linking job stress survey results with EAP usage data to track, on an individual basis, 'who received counseling and whether absenteeism decreased afterward.' The mere fact of EAP usage can be perceived as sensitive, and counseling content is an area subject to stricter confidentiality standards. For evaluating operational performance, it is appropriate to examine usage rates, satisfaction, organizational indicators, and perceived changes among employees together, rather than tracking individuals.

Recommended Posts

❓ FAQ

Q1. Is it absolutely forbidden to connect on an individual basis?

It cannot be concluded that all cases are uniformly prohibited. However, if the purpose is general organizational improvement, it is advisable to first review whether the analysis objective can be achieved without personal connections. If processing at the individual level is required, the purpose, legal basis, whether the information constitutes sensitive data, minimum collection, and access controls must be verified separately.

Q2. If only the name is deleted, is it considered pseudonymized information?

This is not always the case. You must review the requirements for pseudonymization, such as whether an individual can be easily identified when combined with other information and whether additional information is managed separately.

Q3. Is it okay to look at departmental turnover rates and average stress levels together?

If the likelihood of individual identification is low and the purpose of organizational improvement is clear, the risk is lower than direct individual connections. However, in small organizations, a single resignation or high-risk response can be easily estimated, so it is advisable to establish separate aggregation criteria.

Q4. May I show the results of the job stress assessment to my team leader?

It is better to focus on sharing departmental trends and work factors requiring improvement, rather than individual scores or lists of high-risk personnel. Define the scope and purpose of sharing in advance and identify risks associated with minority groups.

👉 Next step

To effectively utilize job stress surveys and HR metrics together, try designing an analysis structure that identifies "which organizational conditions need improvement" rather than trying to find "who is at risk."

Inquire about Job Stress & EAP Operation →

📚 Source and Verification Criteria

This content explains general practical principles for utilizing job stress surveys and organizational indicators together. As the determination of whether job stress results constitute sensitive information, the legal basis for combining HR data, and the applicability of pseudonymization may vary depending on survey items, processing purposes, legal grounds, and organizational circumstances, a review by a personal information protection officer or legal expert may be required when designing actual individual-level analyses. Verification Date: September 21, 2026.

#JobStress #HRData #PrivacyProtection #Pseudonymized information #OrganizationalImprovement
Previous PostNext PostSee List
Comments5
  • Unknown User4
    개선 전후 효과를 보려면 스트레스 점수뿐 아니라 결근이나 이직 추이까지 같이 보는건 좋아보이는데 어느 정도 인원부터 부서 단위로 봐도 안전한지가 궁금하네요
    Profile Image
    넛지EAP(관리자)
    Author
    안녕하세요 넛지EAP입니다 ☺️
법에서 정한 최소 인원이 따로 있는 것은 아니라서 회사 내부 기준으로 미리 정해두시는 것이 좋습니다. 예를 들어 '응답자 10명 미만 부서는 상위 조직과 합산'처럼 숫자로 정해두면 판단이 쉬워지는데, 이 숫자는 법정 기준이 아니라 조직 규모에 맞춰 정하는 내부 기준입니다. 결근·이직처럼 건수가 적은 지표는 분기나 반기 단위로 모아서 보시고, 직급·성별 등으로 더 나누면 특정될 수 있는지도 함께 확인해 주세요. 이 기준을 조사 전에 안내해두면 직원들이 솔직하게 응답하는 데도 도움이 됩니다.
  • Unknown User3
    개인 데이터 연결 없이도 부서별 스트레스랑 이직률 정도만 비교해도 충분히 의미있는 결과가 나올 것 같아요!
  • Unknown User2
    소규모 팀은 부서명만 나와도 누군지 어느정도 예상되는 경우가 있어서.. 집계자료라고 해도 조심해야겠네요
  • Unknown User1
    조직 단위로 보는건 괜찮을 것 같은데 개인별 스트레스 결과랑 결근까지 연결하는건 직원들이 알면 조사 자체를 솔직하게 안할 수도 있을 것 같네요.

Most Engaging Posts in the Community

See more in Best Posts (Real-Time)