Why Mental Wellbeing Must Be a Core Business Strategy for Tech Leaders
According to Nasscom, Erinda Shah, founder and managing director of MHFA India, argues that workplace mental wellbeing should be treated as a business priority, alongside an organisation’s legal responsibilities.
The point matters because sustained pressure and inadequate recovery can drain the cognitive and emotional capacity that technology work relies on. For employees, the practical question is whether wellbeing policies change working conditions or remain an optional benefit.
Wellbeing is tied to the conditions of work
In an interview published by Nasscom, Shah describes mental health interventions as investments that can support employees’ ability to think, collaborate, innovate and perform. She also highlights the costs organisations may overlook when burnout, disengagement, prolonged absence or early departure reduce people’s contribution.
That framing does not establish that a particular programme will prevent burnout or improve performance. It shifts attention toward the mechanics of work: sustained effort is not the same as sustainable performance, and recovery matters when demands remain high. For people already experiencing stress, an employee assistance programme may offer support, but its existence alone says little about workload, pressure or the time available to recover.
Shah’s account also describes the workplace response as a period of experimentation. Organisations have tried policies, employee assistance programmes and cultural changes while navigating limited expertise and evolving practice. The interview does not identify a single approach as proven or provide a measure of which interventions work best.
What employees can check
When assessing a workplace wellbeing offer, look beyond the programme name. Check what support is actually available, how employees access it, and whether the organisation describes steps to address work-related risks as well as individual support. The Nasscom interview does not specify service terms, confidentiality arrangements or eligibility, so those details need to be confirmed directly with an employer or provider.
It is also useful to distinguish support from prevention. Counselling or assistance may help an employee seek care, while persistent overload or insufficient recovery may require changes to working conditions. A policy can address the first without resolving the second.
For now, the signal in Shah’s comments is a change in how employers are being asked to think: mental wellbeing belongs in business planning, not only in a benefits catalogue. Employees can make that shift concrete by asking one specific question: what changes when workload or burnout risk is identified?