The Economist’s recent satirical memo about an office “extreme-wellness” program gone disastrously wrong isn’t just good for a laugh — it’s an insightful indictment of corporate wellness initiatives. Ernest Fadd, the fiction Director of High Performance, proudly reports on employees who tape their mouths shut at night, complete to wake the earliest, and plunge their faces in ice water during meetings. Beyond the laughs is a serious critique of how organizations approach employee wellbeing.

Corporate wellness is an industrial complex: What may begin as genuine concern for employee health often morphs into productivity-obsessed programs built around pseudoscientific trends and unrealistic expectations. The fictional company’s promotion of nasal dilation devices, red-light therapy, and vagus nerve stimulation is a true-to-life mirror to a booming market that feeds off of how real organizations latch onto health fads with minimal evidence but maximum enthusiasm. According to Athletech, blue-chip companies’ investment in their employees’ health has the corporate wellness market on track to grow to nearly USD 105 bn by 2030.

But does it work? The Harvard Business Review reports that despite 85% of the biggest companies in the US offering workplace wellness programs, “the burnout and mental health needs that they are meant to address have continued to escalate.” Fadd’s complete oblivion to the program’s failures reflects how corporate wellness initiatives often double down despite clear evidence they aren’t working — or are even actively causing harm — employees falling asleep during meetings, sustaining injuries from treadmill desks, and suffering from severe malnutrition due to misguided dietary advice. The director chalks it all up to “teething problems” that indicate the need for even more “enhancement.”

What’s the difference between competition and community anyway? Supposedly “community-building” wellness initiatives can actually foster unhealthy competition within a company. Fadd notes that two employees became “extremely competitive with each other about waking times, and ended up not going to bed at all for three days,” caricaturing how metrics-focused wellness programs undermine the very cohesion they claim to promote.

What can leaders learn from this? The Economist’s satire piece offers a wealth of valuable guidance through negative example. HBR writes that a shift from “individual-level interventions like well-being apps, AI chatbots, and employee stress management training, to broader systemic interventions such as workload management and mental health development training for leaders” is necessary to tackle workplace challenges at the root.

One-size-fits-all approaches can be unsustainable and counterproductive: “Lunchtime yoga sounds good in theory,” Dilan Gomih, who has done consulting for Google and JPMorgan told Athletech, “but taking an hour-long break in the middle of the day isn’t feasible for most white-collar workers,” and coming up with a solution that fits into employees’ actual workflows rather than idealized scenarios makes their wellness not only achievable, but convenient. “Too often people go all-in on investments like treadmill desks when they could get the same payoff by giving their employees natural light, fresh air, and some fresh fruit,” André Spicer, Executive Dean of Bayes Business School, told HBR.

Question your motivation: Are you trying to support your employees, or trying to optimize them? If your employees’ wellbeing is your primary concern, direct feedback from them on what changes they could benefit from would be more effective than making an executive decision to install treadmill desks. The most effective wellness initiatives aren’t those with the trendiest biohacks or elaborate programs — they’re the ones grounded in simple human respect. “Wellness shouldn’t be a standalone initiative,” writes Kinney, “It must be woven into the fabric of workplace culture.”