PRC Workforce
Features, Benefits & Value
PRC Workforce · Employer Reference

What PRC does.
What it costs.
What it returns.

A complete reference for HR Directors, Finance leads, and board sponsors. Financial savings, cultural outcomes, employer brand impact, and talent attraction. Every claim sourced.

£103bn
Total annual UK cost of workforce sickness · IPPR, 2024
44
Productive days lost per employee per year, on average · IPPR, 2024
44 days
Lost per employee per year to working through it, against 6.7 days to sickness absence · IPPR, 2024
86%
Of candidates check employer reviews before applying · Glassdoor, 2025
£30,614
Average cost of replacing one professional employee · Oxford Economics & Unum, 2014
What PRC is

A 90-day behavioural protocol.
Delivered by email. Anonymous by architecture.

PRC is not a platform, a wellbeing app, or a coaching programme. It is a structured email sequence that identifies the automatic patterns reducing a person's output, builds replacements, and installs those replacements until they run without effort. No sessions. No disclosure. No clinical record. No IT integration required.

Delivery
58 structured inputs across 90 days. 74 emails in total.
Delivered to the participant's personal inbox on a fixed schedule. Three phases: Mapping (days 1–30), Redesign (31–60), Installation (61–90). The two figures reconcile as follows: 58 structured inputs from Day 1 to Day 90, plus 13 weekly worksheets closing each protocol week, plus a pre-start email, a closing email on Day 90 and a post-protocol email on Day 91. That is 74 emails across a 91-day span for a 90-day protocol. No login. No app. No new behaviour required to access it.
Anonymity
Anonymous to your employer by architecture
Participants enrol on a personal device using a personal email. A seat number is assigned. The email is held only to deliver the protocol and is never shared with the employer. Nothing the participant writes is stored at any point. The record is deleted on request at any time, and on a defined retention schedule set out in the data processing agreement. To the organisation, each participant is a seat number and nothing more. This is architecture, not policy.
Measurement
PRC Index · 7 measures at 4 points
Self-rated at Days 1, 30, 60, and 90 across seven operational measures: output quality, decision confidence, focus, presence in meetings, energy management, reset between demands, perceived operational capacity. Aggregate cohort movement reported quarterly to the employer.
Evidence base
Five published research frameworks
Beck (CBT, cognitive model), Linehan (behavioural chain analysis, phase sequencing), Wood and Neal (habit and context, environmental cues), Gollwitzer (implementation intentions, if/then planning), Lally (automaticity, 66-day average, 18 to 254 day range). Each maps directly to a protocol phase.
Deployment
Site-wide licence. No seat cap. No IT.
One licence covers the entire workforce. Anyone can enrol at any time from any device. No IT integration, no HR system involvement, no rationing decisions. Seat activation within 48 hours of procurement. HR sets up the initial communication. After that, the system runs.
Clinical boundary
Performance protocol. Not clinical provision.
PRC does not diagnose, treat, or refer. No clinical record is created. If a clinical concern surfaces, the participant is directed to their GP or NHS 111 · their seat is held with no fee. PRC sits alongside existing EAP and Occupational Health provision. No contract changes required.
Reporting
Aggregate cohort data. Quarterly.
Seat numbers, completion rates, and aggregate PRC Index movement across the cohort. Nothing that identifies an individual. Quarterly reporting tied to protocol completion cycles. Board-level briefing available on Corporate and Enterprise tiers.
Contract
12-month rolling. 90 days notice.
Priced per employee per year. Site-wide. No seat caps. 12-month rolling contract on Standard and above; the Pilot is a one-off 90-day cohort. 90 days notice to cancel. Direct access to Jon Cull on every tier. No account management layer. No onboarding fees.
The cost of doing nothing

The pattern does not plateau.
It compounds.

Every quarter a pattern runs unchecked, the gap between what a person is capable of and what they are producing widens. The people around them absorb the drag. The decisions they are not making, the conversations they are not having · that cost is already on your books. It is just not on a line item you can see yet.

What inaction costs
Workforce sickness
£103bn
Total annual UK cost (IPPR, 2024). Absence and working while a pattern is running, counted together · 44 lost productive days per employee per year versus 6.7 to absence.
One senior professional
£10,500
Lost output from one £70k employee at 70% capacity for six months. Illustrative but directly calculable for any salary.
SSP liability · from April 2026
£400m
New annual SSP cost added to UK employers under the Employment Rights Act 2025 (DWP, Economic Analysis). SSP now applies from day one of any absence. Every pattern that generates absence is a direct payroll liability.
Replacement cost
£30,614
Average cost of replacing one professional employee · recruitment, onboarding, lost institutional knowledge. The real figure in 2026 is higher.
Team drag
Unquantified but real. A senior professional operating at 70% capacity slows the decisions, approvals, and outputs of everyone reporting to them. That multiplier is not captured in any single-person calculation.
What PRC costs
A funded place
£0
A full 90-day run at no cost, for three organisations. Whatever output comes back is recovered against nothing spent.
The Reach Audit that comes first
£3,450
Plus VAT, one site of up to 500 staff. An anonymous measurement across your own workforce, about three weeks end to end. You keep the written report whatever you decide next, and it is yours to circulate internally.
What you actually commit
One email
You forward one paragraph to your people, and give me half an hour at the end to go through the report. No staff list, no budget line.
No IT cost
£0
No integration. No infrastructure. No onboarding fee. No account management overhead. Runs entirely on email.
No HR management overhead
£0
After the initial deployment communication, the protocol runs automatically. HR is not in the loop at any stage of delivery.
Daily cost · one affected senior
~£81
Lost output per working day at 70% capacity. £70k salary basis. PRC calculation On a 30% capacity-gap basis, IPPR, 2024.
4-week decision window cost
~£1,600
Output lost from one person during a typical procurement delay.
Quarterly inaction cost · 5 seniors
~£26,250
Five affected professionals at £70k, 70% capacity, one quarter. PRC calculation On a 30% capacity-gap basis, IPPR, 2024.
vs what a funded place costs you
£0
A full 90 days across your whole workforce, at my cost.

Lost output: PRC illustrative calculation on IPPR, 2024 lost-output basis · SSP: DWP, Economic Analysis (effective April 2026) · Replacement cost: Oxford Economics and Unum, 2014

Financial return

Where the savings land.
And how to calculate them.

PRC produces financial return across five categories. Each is independently calculable using your own payroll data. The figures below use a 250-employee organisation with 10% of the workforce carrying an active pattern as the worked example.

Saving category
Worked example · 250 employees, 10% affected
Your calculation
Lost output regained
Output returned from participants who complete the protocol and restore productive capacity.
£52,500
25 affected × £70k salary × 30% capacity gap × 6 months = £262,500 potential; £52,500 shown assumes a conservative 20% realised. PRC calculation Capacity-gap basis from IPPR, 2024.
Affected headcount × avg salary × capacity gap × measurement period × realised uplift rate.
Retention · potential value of avoided replacement Scenario
Potential value of avoided turnover, not turnover demonstrated to have been avoided. Professionals carrying an unaddressed pattern are more likely to leave. Whether PRC changes that rate is untested.
£91,842
Assumes 3 retentions avoided × £30,614 replacement cost (Oxford Economics & Unum, 2014). Conservative estimate of 12% annual attrition from affected population. PRC calculation
Estimated leavers from affected group × £30,614 replacement cost (Oxford Economics & Unum, 2014).
SSP liability reduction
Patterns that generate absence now trigger SSP from day one under the Employment Rights Act 2025 (Acas, SSP).
Variable
Each absence day avoided saves SSP (£123.25 a week from 6 April 2026, Acas, SSP) plus management time, cover costs, and productivity loss from the team.
Estimated absence days reduced × SSP daily rate + internal cover cost.
Management time · potential saving Scenario
HR, line manager and senior leadership time spent on performance issues, absence and informal support conversations. This is time the organisation is already spending.
Variable
Typically 4–8 hours per month per managed case. PRC is designed to address the pattern before it reaches a manager. How many cases that removes from the queue is untested.
Active managed cases × estimated management hours × manager hourly rate.
What has to come back to break even
How much of the opportunity below you would need to recover for this to pay for itself.
Nothing
On a funded place nothing has to come back, because nothing was spent. For scale: one affected £70k senior recovering their capacity gap over six months is worth about £10,500 on its own. PRC calculation
What it costs you ÷ the opportunity identified. Requires no assumption about retention, recruitment or absence.
Total opportunity identified · 250 employees Example figures
~£144,000
Rounded deliberately, because every input is an assumption and precision beyond this would be false. This is the ceiling of the model, not a forecast, and no finished group has produced it. PRC calculation
£52,500 on output alone
Recovered output, before any retention, recruitment or absence effect. PRC calculation The lines above depend on retention and recruitment assumptions holding, and no finished group has shown either yet. Judge this on the output line, which needs the fewest assumptions of any figure here.

Stated assumptions. Every figure in this table derives from four inputs, all of which the buyer can change: an affected population of 25 in 250 (10%), an average salary of £70,000, a capacity gap of 30% while a pattern is running, and a six-month measurement period. The 10% and the 30% are PRC working assumptions, not published figures. Substitute your own and the break-even moves accordingly. PRC calculation

All figures illustrative. Lost-output basis: IPPR, 2024 · Replacement cost: Oxford Economics and Unum, 2014 · SSP: DWP, Economic Analysis

Cultural outcomes

What changes in the organisation
when patterns stop running.

Financial savings are quantifiable. Cultural change is not · but it is real, it compounds over time, and it produces outcomes that show up in retention data, engagement scores, and the quality of decisions made under pressure. These are the mechanisms.

01
Mechanism
Avoidance patterns stop running at senior level
The most costly patterns in any organisation are the ones running in the people who make decisions. A senior leader whose default is to delay difficult conversations, defer decisions under uncertainty, or present at reduced capacity · that pattern costs the organisation in every direction it faces.
Cultural outcome
Decisions move faster. Conversations happen sooner. The bottleneck that looked like a structural problem · the stalled project, the unresolved conflict, the strategy that never quite got confirmed · turns out to have been a pattern in a person. When the pattern is replaced, the organisation moves differently.
02
Mechanism
Depleted people stop depleting teams
A professional operating at 70% capacity does not absorb that cost alone. Their direct reports receive less attention, less clarity, and less pace. Their peers carry more. The team's collective output is lower than any individual calculation captures.
Cultural outcome
Team performance lifts without team-level intervention. When the person at the head of a team restores capacity, the team restores with them. The morale impact of that change is disproportionate · a high-functioning senior is a multiplier, not just an individual contributor.
03
Mechanism
Private provision signals genuine commitment
An EAP that most employees will never use is a compliance exercise. A protocol that reaches the people who actively choose not to engage with conventional provision sends a different signal: the organisation has thought about what actually works for senior professionals, not just what looks good in a benefits summary.
Cultural outcome
The signal is specificity, not provision. Employees read the difference between a platform added to the benefits stack and a product that was built because someone understood why the standard routes fail. That distinction affects trust · and trust is the substrate of culture.
04
Mechanism
Normalisation without disclosure
PRC removes the equation between needing help and being seen to need help. When a protocol is available to everyone and used by no one visibly, it changes what the organisation implicitly says about patterns, performance, and what it means to carry something privately.
Cultural outcome
The culture becomes one where addressing patterns is normal · not where disclosing them is required. That distinction matters enormously to the professionals this product reaches. They do not need permission to use it and no one needs to know they did.
05
Mechanism
Lost output becomes visible and addressable
The aggregate PRC Index provides, for the first time, a quarterly read on how the workforce rates its own operational output. Not engagement. Not satisfaction. Actual self-rated performance across seven measures. That data has commercial utility independent of any individual outcome.
Cultural outcome
Leadership can see the gap between what the organisation says and what the workforce experiences. If a cohort rates decision confidence at 4.8 on Day 1 and 7.1 on Day 90, that would be a measurable read on how the organisation was running before and after. Illustrative Figures shown are illustrative of the output format, not results. That measurement is new information.
Employer brand

A non-toxic culture is not just
a retention asset. It is a recruitment asset.

Employer brand is now a pre-application filter. Candidates evaluate company culture before they apply, before they look at salary, and · in many cases · before they look at the job description. An organisation that demonstrably invests in the people other companies write off appears differently in that pre-application scan than one that does not.

83%
Of job seekers research company reviews and ratings before deciding where to apply.
Glassdoor, 2025
75%
Of job seekers evaluate employer brand before considering salary or job title.
LinkedIn Talent Solutions
55%
Of candidates walk away from a company with poor reviews · regardless of role or salary offered.
Glassdoor, 2025
50%
Reduction in cost per hire for organisations with a strong employer brand.
LinkedIn Talent Solutions
28%
Decrease in employee turnover attributed to strong employer branding.
LinkedIn, 2024
+20%
More job clicks when a company's Glassdoor rating improves by just 0.5 stars.
Glassdoor, 2025

The mechanism: PRC does not appear in a marketing brochure. It appears when a current employee is asked · in a Glassdoor review, an interview conversation, or an offboarding survey · what the organisation does differently. The answer "they have a completely private performance protocol that HR cannot access" is a specific, credible, memorable signal. It is the opposite of a wellness platform nobody uses. It is provision that actually reached them.

"I joined because three people in my network mentioned something they could not say much about · that the company had provided something private that worked. That specificity mattered more than any benefits package."

Talent attraction

Does PRC make a company more
attractive to potential hires?
Yes. Here is how.

The question is not whether a non-toxic, high-trust culture attracts talent. The published data points consistently in one direction. The question is whether PRC contributes to that culture in a way that is visible to potential hires. It does · through four distinct mechanisms.

01
Mechanism
Word of mouth from current employees
83% of job seekers research company reviews and ratings before deciding where to apply Glassdoor, 2025. Their primary source is not the careers page. It is current and former employees, whose accounts carry more weight with candidates than anything the company publishes about itself. A workforce where PRC has been deployed includes people who have used private, effective provision that nothing else delivered.
Attraction outcome
The review is specific, not generic. "They have a completely private 90-day protocol · HR cannot see who uses it" is a different signal from "great culture." It is specific, credible, and unusual. Specificity is what candidates remember and repeat.
02
Mechanism
Gen Z and Millennial screening criteria
44% of Gen Z say they have already rejected an employer whose values did not match their own Deloitte, 2024. That is a recorded behaviour, not a stated preference. This cohort screens employers on whether stated values match actual practice, and its share of the UK workforce rises every year. An EAP nobody uses does not pass that screen. A protocol that reaches the people conventional provision does not reach, and that is genuinely private, does.
Attraction outcome
PRC is proof, not promise. Younger candidates have high tolerance for imperfection and low tolerance for performative provision. A product that was built because the standard routes fail · and that works because of how it is built, not because of how it is marketed · reads as real. That is the differentiator.
03
Mechanism
Senior professional screening criteria
Experienced professionals moving roles at senior level are the candidates most likely to have done the insurance calculation. They know what a clinical record costs. An organisation that provides effective, non-clinical, completely private provision removes a barrier that most employers do not even know exists in the candidate's head.
Attraction outcome
The insurance argument is a pull factor for the exact population PRC is built for. A senior professional who has previously avoided support because of what a clinical record does to their insurance cover will notice · and value · an employer who has solved that problem structurally. That is a differentiated offer. No other employer benefit removes this specific barrier.
04
Mechanism
Reduced vacancy periods and hiring costs
Strong employer brands are reported to reduce cost of hiring by up to 50% and employee turnover by 28% LinkedIn Talent Solutions. Every incremental improvement to employer brand reputation compounds. A 0.5-star improvement in Glassdoor rating produces 20% more job clicks and 16% more application starts Glassdoor, 2025.
Attraction outcome
Fewer roles filled by agency. Shorter time to fill. Lower cost per hire. The aggregate effect of a genuinely differentiated employer brand · one built on real provision that real employees talk about · shows up in recruitment economics. The saving compounds annually. At 50% cost-per-hire reduction across three to five senior hires, the annual saving is material against the licence cost.
Employer brand · application starts
+16%
More application starts following a 0.5-point improvement in Glassdoor rating. Glassdoor, 2025.
Cost per hire reduction
50%
For organisations with strong employer brand vs average. LinkedIn Talent Solutions.

Candidate research behaviour and Glassdoor rating impact: Glassdoor, 2025 · Cost of hiring and turnover figures: LinkedIn Talent Solutions, from LinkedIn survey data of 2,250 corporate recruiters, publisher-stated · Values-based employer rejection: Deloitte, 2024, global sample of nearly 23,000 across 44 countries, not UK-only

Investment

Both are priced.
Three protocol places are still funded by me.

Anyone in your workforce can take part privately at any time, and you never see who. What it costs you is set out below.

The Workforce Reach Audit is priced and you can commission it today. It is a measurement, not the protocol. It tells you how much of your workforce your existing provision actually reaches, and how many of your people it never gets to.

£3,450 plus VAT · one organisation, one site, up to 500 staff
£5,450 plus VAT · up to five sites or five parts of the business, any size
£1,750 plus VAT · repeat audit at twelve months, for the comparison
£4,650 plus VAT · both audits committed together, single site

Invite at least two hundred people. Thirty replies is the reporting floor, and if fewer than thirty reply no figures are issued, there is no administration charge, and you receive a Response Deficit Report instead. There is no breakdown by department, site or team. Three whole-organisation cuts are reported and nothing else: how long people have been with you, whether they manage anybody, and how they work, meaning on site, hybrid, remote, or shift and field based. Each side of each cut has to reach thirty replies on its own or it is folded back into the total. Beyond those three, nothing is collected that could form a group.

The 90-day protocol is £9,750 plus VAT a year. One licence for one site of up to 500 employees. Above 500 it is priced on headcount, from £9,750. Your audit fee comes off it in full, so it is £6,300 if you proceed within 30 days of your report, or by your next board or HR committee, whichever comes sooner.

Three organisations can run the full 90 days at no cost. Three is what I can fund, and each one takes 90 days of my time, so places do not come back quickly. Places go in the order Reach Audits finish, not the order enquiries arrive. The fourth organisation to reach the front of that queue pays £9,750 plus VAT, less the audit fee already paid.

A funded place is agreed in writing before it starts. In return I ask for three things, none of which is money: the anonymous before-and-after figures from your group, one HR Director willing to take a phone call from another, and their agreement to the founding rate of £9,750, held for them for twelve months after the funded place ends.

It is one annual licence covering everybody you employ. No cap on numbers, no rationing, no deciding who gets a place. At 500 employees that is £19.50 a head for the year, and £12.60 once the audit fee comes off. A single line in a budget, alongside the EAP, aimed at the people it does not reach.

Compared to EAP: Your EAP budget is committed and it earns its place, for the people who do ring it (EAPA UK, 2024), it does exactly what it is designed to do. But the format only reaches the people who put their hand up. The people it structurally excludes are the same people now generating day-one SSP liability on your payroll, so it cannot reduce that exposure. PRC is delivered to every employee, which is what lets it work on the liability the EAP cannot touch.

Summary

What PRC is built to address.
Across every dimension.

Financial · direct
Lost output recovered
UK employees lose an average of 44 productive days a year to working while a pattern is running, against 6.7 days lost to sickness absence (IPPR, 2024). The larger figure is the one nobody tracks. PRC addresses the days that do not show up on a sickness record but show up on everything else.
Financial · indirect
Replacement cost avoided
The professional carrying an unaddressed pattern is more likely to leave. At £30,614 average replacement cost for an employee earning £25,000 a year, and more for a senior professional (Oxford Economics & Unum, 2014), three avoided departures per year at a 250-person organisation cover the licence cost several times over.
Financial · statutory
SSP liability reduced
Since 6 April 2026, SSP applies from day one of any absence under the Employment Rights Act 2025, at £123.25 a week or 80% of average weekly earnings, whichever is lower (Acas, SSP). Every pattern that generates absence is now a direct payroll liability. PRC addresses the pattern before the absence occurs.
Cultural
Decisions move. Teams lift.
When the person at the head of a team operates at full capacity, the team restores with them. The multiplier effect of a high-functioning senior is disproportionate · in both directions. PRC addresses that multiplier at source.
Cultural
Normalisation without disclosure
PRC changes what the organisation implicitly says about carrying something privately. When private, effective provision is available to everyone, addressing a pattern becomes normal. That is a cultural shift that no wellbeing platform produces.
Employer brand
Specific, credible, repeatable
83% of job seekers research company reviews and ratings before applying (Glassdoor, 2025). What they find from current employees matters more than what appears on a careers page. PRC produces a specific, repeatable, credible story · one that sounds different from every other employer because it is.
Talent attraction · general
Employer brand economics
Strong employer brands reduce cost of hiring by up to 50% and turnover by 28% (LinkedIn Talent Solutions). A 0.5-star Glassdoor improvement drives 20% more job clicks and 16% more application starts. Whether PRC moves those figures for a given employer is untested. The proposed route is not marketing but what employees say about provision they have actually used.
Talent attraction · senior
The insurance argument
Senior professionals considering a move are running the insurance calculation. A clinical record affects premium loading and policy validity at claim. PRC creates no clinical record. For the candidate who has already done this calculation, an employer who has solved it structurally is meaningfully differentiated.
Talent attraction · Gen Z
Values alignment, not values statements
44% of Gen Z have already rejected an employer on values grounds (Deloitte, 2024). They distinguish between performative provision and actual investment. A protocol that was built because the standard routes fail · and that works because of its architecture · reads as real. That passes the screen.
References

Every figure, and where it comes from.

Each source below is cited in gold beside the claim it supports. Primary sources are linked to the original work. The employer-brand figures are stated by their publishers and are marked for verification · confirm each against its named source before relying on it in a pitch.

Primary sources
Employer-brand figures, publisher-stated, primary source to confirm

Start with a Reach Audit across your own workforce.

See the Workforce Reach Audit → Apply for a funded place → Or speak to Jon direct → jon@prcworkforce.com +44 7493 087262 www.prcworkforce.com