Back to articles

Measuring work pressure: is recovery getting enough attention?

28 September 2026 - Written by Marit Laan

In short

  • A workload score shows how hard employees experience their work demands, but not always whether that burden decreases sufficiently between workdays.
  • Recovery is not just about rest in the evening. Breaks, schedules, accessibility, and the ability to detach from work mentally are often also relevant.
  • Identify the causes, recovery options, and outcomes separately. This way, you avoid fatigue being treated solely as an individual problem.
  • Use employee feedback together with information about working hours, staffing, and work processes. A correlation between scores is not proof of causality.

Measuring work pressure often involves questions about pace, workload, and deadlines. That’s logical, but possibly incomplete. Two teams may report similar workload requirements, while one team regains its strength after peak workloads, and the other is structurally underperforming. It’s this difference that can be important for sustainable employability.

The National Survey on Working Conditions 2025 shows why this topic deserves attention. In 2025, 21% of the employees reported burnout symptoms, described as emotional exhaustion caused by work. In 2023, that figure was 19%. Additionally, 37% found that additional measures were needed to combat work pressure and work stress. These nationwide figures describe self-reported experiences. They do not constitute a medical diagnosis and do not prove what caused the complaints. However, they make it clear that looking only at absenteeism can be too late and too limited.

When measuring work pressure, it can be valuable to also assess recovery during and after work. The goal here is not to assess employees on their ability to relax, but to investigate whether the work environment provides sufficient space for recovery.

What is recovery after work?

Short answer: recovery is the process in which tax responses that have built up during work are reduced again. This can occur during short breaks, between shifts, in the evening, on weekends, and during holidays.

People who recover better report more favorable outcomes on average, but this does not mean that a single recovery intervention will have the same effects. Work characteristics, health, home situation, and personality can also explain the relationship.

The research literature often distinguishes between four recovery experiences: psychologically distancing oneself from work, relaxing, learning something, or engaging in activities outside of work, and taking control of free time. Especially psychological distancing does not mean that someone is indifferent; it means that the work does not continuously require attention and mental energy.

Why an average workload score is not enough

A score on quantitative task requirements usually refers to having to work quickly, doing a lot of work, and working extra hard. This provides valuable information about the workload. It tells less about its duration and the space to recover from it.

The NEA 2025 report, for example, shows that 69% of the employees sometimes overexerted themselves and that 39% were often or always available to colleagues or customers outside of working hours. On average, they worked 2.5 hours per week overtime. Such figures in themselves do not mean that recovery is impossible. Incidental overtime can be part of a temporary peak. However, structural accessibility, unpredictable schedules, or consecutive intensive shifts can limit the time and mental space for recovery.

Therefore, when measuring work pressure, look at three different layers:

  1. Taxation: How much, how quickly, how difficult or emotionally taxing is the work?
  2. Reparation options: Are there useful breaks, predictable working hours, space for regulation, and sufficient time between stressful periods?
  3. Results: Do employees feel recovered after resting, do they continue to worry, or do they already start to feel tired the next workday?

These components are usually not converted into a single overall score. A favorable average workload can coexist with poor recovery options for a small group. Conversely, a team may experience temporarily high demands and still have sufficient regulatory leeway, support, and recovery.

What else should you measure besides work pressure?

The possibility of recovering during work

Recovery does not begin at home. Ask whether employees can actually take breaks, be able to briefly divert their attention, and be able to perform a less demanding activity after an intensive task. The formal right to a break does not yet say whether planning, staffing, and team norms make its use possible.

State the questions in concrete terms. For example: “During my work, I can take sufficient (short) moments to recover from intensive tasks.” Combine this with questions about causes: which tasks make pausing difficult, at what times does it happen, and which groups are affected?

Taking a break and accessibility outside of working hours

Don’t just ask how many messages someone receives after work hours. Also research what kind of response is expected. A message without a reply obligation has a different impact than an informal norm of being immediately available. Also reachability services can be separately surveyed; that includes reachability as part of the function, but frequency, predictability, and recovery between services are potentially relevant.

Predictability and influence on working hours

A schedule can be contractually correct and still complicate recovery due to late changes, short breaks, or an unfavorable service mix. Office workers can experience similar uncertainty when deadlines and evening work become unexpected. This can make it interesting to measure the predictability of work.

Recovery outcomes without a medical diagnosis

An employee survey can ask whether someone feels sufficiently recovered before the next work period, has difficulty getting out of bed, or starts to feel structurally fatigued. Do not use terms like burnout. A low recovery score is not evidence that work is the sole cause. Sleep, caregiving, health, and events outside of work can play a role. At the same time, that uncertainty should not be used as a reason to ignore manageable work factors.

From employee feedback to the causes of work

A key pitfall is that recovery translates into lifestyle advice, while the source of the burden remains unchanged. A workshop on relaxation can be helpful, but it is not the only measure to address structural understaffing, constant overtime, or conflicting priorities.

Employee feedback can be linked to data about the work itself. Think of schedules, overtime, open positions, peak periods, caseload, processing times, and changes outside of working hours.

If a team reports high demands and few opportunities for breaks, the planning may be relevant. If letting go after work is especially difficult, unclear responsibilities, emotionally demanding work, or accessibility standards may require further investigation. If necessary, discuss such statements with employees and managers before choosing a measure.

The Dutch Labour Inspectorate places work stress within psychosocial work stress. Employers are required to base PSA policies on the RI&E, identify the causes, take measures in an action plan, and evaluate whether they are effective. employee survey It can provide important input for this, but does not completely replace the RI&E and professional assessment.

Conclusion

Measuring work pressure is usually stronger when not only the level of the workload is visible, but also the way it is distributed. Can employees recover during and after work? Is free time regularly interrupted? And do people resume their work with sufficient energy after a break?

Recovery is not solely a private matter for employees here. Decisions regarding capacity, accessibility, schedules, and priorities also determine how much space people have to build up their savings. Therefore, measure recovery as diagnostic information and link the results to concrete work characteristics. This creates a more focused discussion about sustainable employability: not only about how many people can contribute, but also about the conditions under which they can recharge again.

Sources