Recovery in the workplace: a systematic and critical review of the literature

This systematic and critical umbrella review examines the essential role of recovery in increasingly demanding work environments often characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). Recovery is central to preserving well-being and preventing psychosocial risks. Conducted as an umbrella review following PRISMA guidelines, the search (May 26, 2025) across APA PsycINFO, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Cairn identified ten eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The absence of relevant French-language reviews in Cairn underscores the need for more systematic syntheses on this topic within the francophone literature. Recovery is defined as the process that alleviates the physiological and psychological strain accumulated during work, enabling individuals to return to a pre-strain state. Two major theoretical frameworks structure current understanding. The Effort-Recovery Model posits that work demands create load reactions; if recovery remains incomplete, individuals accumulate strain and an increased Need for Recovery. The Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory emphasizes that stress results from the loss or threat of loss of resources. Recovery restores these resources and helps prevent loss spirals. From this framework emerges the “recovery paradox,” whereby individuals experiencing the highest strain often have the greatest difficulty engaging in recovery behaviors, particularly psychological detachment. The literature distinguishes between internal recovery (short breaks during the workday) and external recovery (evenings, weekends, vacations). It also differentiates between recovery activities and the psychological experiences they elicit. Four experiences play a central role: psychological detachment (mental disengagement from work), relaxation (low activation), mastery (challenging leisure and skill development), and control (autonomy over leisure activities).

Effective recovery is consistently associated with improved well-being, mental health, work engagement, job performance, and lower risk of burnout and stress-related disorders. Conversely, high workload, job stress, and poor sleep deplete resources and elevate the Need for Recovery. Two major assessment tools dominate the field: the unidimensional Need for Recovery Scale, mainly used clinically, and the multidimensional Recovery Experience Questionnaire, which assesses detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control.The review highlights a conceptual distinction between recovery (stress reduction) and replenishment/ressourcement, defined as proactive activities that enrich overall well-being. This distinction aligns with the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model. Future research should better understand internal recovery, clarify organizational antecedents such as leadership and culture, and adopt multilevel approaches that go beyond individual responsibility. Managers are key actors in cultivating environments that facilitate psychological detachment and sustainable well-being.