Why the idea of an ‘ideal worker’ can be so harmful for people with mental health conditions

In the modern world of work, the “ideal worker” is a dominant yet dangerous concept that can dictate workplace norms and expectations. This archetype describes an employee who is boundlessly productive, constantly available and emotionally stable at all times.

What makes this trope so flawed is that it assumes workers have no caring responsibilities outside work, or have unrealistic physical and psychological capabilities. It’s intended to drive efficiency, but in fact it is a standard that very few people can reach. It marginalises people who deviate from these rigid standards, including workers managing mental health^[1] conditions.

We are researchers in management and health, and our recent paper found that this “ideal worker” is a means of creating stigma^[2]. This stigma is embedded in processes and policies, creating a yardstick against which all employees are measured.

The study is based on in-depth interviews with a diverse group of employees with mental health conditions (including depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety and OCD). They worked across the private, public and third sectors in various jobs, including accounting, engineering, teaching and senior management.

For workers with mental health conditions, the expectation of emotional steadiness creates a conflict with the often fluctuating nature of their conditions.

When organisations are seen to value the ideal worker archetype, they can end up creating barriers^[3] to meaningful inclusion. In our paper we understand these as both “barriers to doing” and “barriers to being”.

What this means is that workplaces end up with rigid workloads and inflexible expectations (“barriers to doing”). As such, they fail to accommodate people with invisible or fluctuating symptoms. They can also undermine a worker’s identity and self-worth (“barriers to being”), framing them as unreliable or incompetent simply because they do not meet the standards of the ideal worker.

Because employees with mental health conditions often fear being perceived as weak, a burden or fragile, they frequently work excessively hard to prove their value. This means that these employees might compromise their resting and unwinding time in order to live up to workplace expectations.

But of course, these efforts create strain at the personal level. These workers can end up putting themselves at greater risk of relapse or ill health. Our research found that overworking to mask mental health symptoms (working unpaid hours to make up for times when they are unwell, for example) can suggest an organisational culture that may not be inclusive enough.

HR practices may assume that mental health conditions should be managed by employees alone, rather than with support from the organisation. At the same time, this constant pressure to over-perform can exacerbate mental health conditions, leading to a vicious cycle of stress, exhaustion and even more stigma.

The ideal worker norm forces many employees into keeping their mental health conditions to themselves. They may see hiding their struggles as a tactical way of protecting their professional identity.

In an environment that rewards constant productivity, disclosing a condition that might require reasonable adjustments could be seen as a professional risk. In other words, stigma may compromise career chances.

Participants in our research reported lying on health questionnaires or hiding symptoms because the climate in their workplace signalled that mental health conditions were poorly understood. But this secrecy creates a massive emotional burden, as workers felt pressure to constantly monitor their health, mask their condition and schedule medical appointments in secret.

Paradoxically, while this approach allows people to remain employed, it reinforces the structures that demand their silence. And it ensures that workplace support remains invisible or inaccessible.