Bradford Factor Alternatives: Practical Ways to Manage Absence in 2026

Managing absences has traditionally been seen as a disruption that costs businesses money, putting pressure on the rest of the team. But, absence management in 2026 isn’t about tracking disruptions, but understanding patterns, supporting wellbeing and building a healthier workforce.

For decades the Bradford Factor has been the go-to tool for HR professionals to measure sickness and absence management. While it can still be useful for spotting patterns, many organisations are now rethinking how it’s applied, especially as workplaces become more focused on wellbeing, flexibility and fairness.

With mental health, flexible working and burnout topping the charts, absence trends are sending a clear warning sign. Nearly *half of employees (49%) say they’ve taken a sick day due to mental or emotional exhaustion, while 39% report feeling overwhelmed and in need of a break.

These figures suggest it may be time to move beyond the Bradford Factor and rethink how absence is measured and managed. Instead of simply scoring absence, organisations need smarter alternatives and absence management strategies that address the root causes and genuinely support employee wellbeing. Let’s dive in.

Understanding the strengths and limits of the Bradford Factor

While the Bradford Factor is widely used, it has long been debated within HR for its limitations when applied in isolation. It’s important to acknowledge why it became so widely used in the first place and why many HR teams still rely on it today.

When used carefully, the Bradford Factor does offer some practical benefits:

• Simple and easy to understand – The formula is straightforward, making it accessible for managers and HR teams without advanced data expertise.
• Highlights patterns of frequent short-term absence – It can help surface repeated short absences that may be disruptive for teams and harder to manage operationally than a single long period of leave.
• Provides a consistent framework across teams – In larger or decentralised organisations, Bradford can reduce subjective decision-making and help ensure absence is monitored more consistently.
• Acts as a prompt for early conversations – When used as a conversation starter (rather than a judgement), it can help managers check in with employees and explore whether support is needed.
• Supports basic trend monitoring – For organisations without sophisticated HR systems, Bradford offers a simple way to track absence patterns over time.

However, the challenge is that absence isn’t always behavioural and a single score can’t reliably reflect the complexity behind why someone is off work. As we’ve explored above, Bradford-style scoring can miss context, treat health-related patterns as risk, and apply the same thresholds across very different roles and industries.

That’s why many organisations are moving away from using the Bradford Factor as a trigger for disciplinary action, and instead using it (if at all) as one signal among several alongside manager judgement, wellbeing conversations, role context and trend-based insights.

In other words: Bradford isn’t “wrong” — it’s just incomplete on its own. And in 2026, absence management works best when measurement is paired with empathy, support, and smarter interventions. 

Why the Bradford Factor needs a rethink

If you’ve been in HR for more than five minutes, you’ll know the Bradford Factor formula:

B = S² X D (Bradford Factor, S = Spells of absence and D = number of days absent).

The Bradford Factor was designed to highlight frequent short-term absences, which are arguably more disruptive than a single long-term absence. While the theory is sound (lots of little breaks cause chaos) it’s the application that is where it falls apart.

Limitations of punitive scoring systems

The Bradford Factor reduces your employees to a number. A high score automatically triggers a warning or disciplinary action. The problem is, it ignores context and the data shows that context is everything. 

It penalises chronic conditions, not disruption

The Bradford Factor was designed to flag frequent, disruptive absence. But our data* shows that employees with long-term or age-related health needs are not absent more often, they’re just absent for longer.

Employees aged 55–64 average 2.5 absence spells per year, almost identical to younger age groups, but take 9.2 days off per employee, compared to 4.5–6.8 days for those under 45.

The 65+ group follows the same pattern, with 2.5 spells but 12.7 days absent per employee. Bradford drives higher target scores for these groups, even though their absence is infrequent, predictable and often health-related. Support needs end up treated as behavioural risk.

It mistakes normal behaviour for a problem

Across almost every demographic, absence frequency is remarkably consistent. Most employees, regardless of gender, role seniority or industry, take around 2.4 to 3.0 absence spells per year. By squaring the number of absence spells, the Bradford Factor turns an entirely normal pattern of short-term illness into an inflated risk score, creating false positives at scale.

It disproportionately punishes transparency and younger workers

In Accounting, HR and Legal, Gen Z employees average *5.3 absence spells per year and 6.6 days off per employee, resulting in a Bradford score of 185. 

In the same industry, Gen X averages *2.7 spells and 4.6 days, with a score of just 35. The difference might not be commitment, it could highlight the impact of visibility and whether sick leave is accurately reported and logged. Or it could be a real dynamic happening in that industry with different age cohorts. The point is that we don’t know for sure. 

It ignores mental health and actively makes it worse

Burnout, stress and anxiety rarely appear as one long period of absence. They show up as repeated short breaks; exactly the pattern Bradford treats most harshly. Employees in high-pressure sectors like Healthcare and Community Services average 9.2 days absent per employee, despite relatively low absence frequency (2.4 spells). A punitive scoring model discourages recovery, pushing people toward presenteeism, disengagement and eventually much longer periods away from work.

It applies arbitrary thresholds across completely different realities

There is no such thing as a universal “bad” Bradford score, yet many policies assume there is. Target Bradford Factors range from 25 in Education & Training, to 31 in Retail & Hospitality, all the way up to 113 in Accounting, HR & Legal and 64 in Call Centres & Customer Service. A score that triggers concern in one industry would be entirely normal in another, but Bradford rarely accounts for that nuance.

And ultimately, it damages culture

When absence is reduced to a disciplinary number, trust erodes. Employees learn to hide illness instead of managing it. Managers focus on thresholds instead of conversations. What should be a wellbeing signal becomes a fear trigger and the data shows that it doesn’t reduce absence, it simply delays it.

Modern workplaces need a more holistic approach. One that recognises patterns without punishing people, separates health signals from misconduct and focuses on early support instead of late-stage discipline.

Alternative absence management strategies for 2026

Where the Bradford Factor focuses on measurement, smarter absence management focuses on insight, support and prevention.

In 2026, the goal isn’t to catch people out, but to spot patterns early, respond proportionately and support employees before short-term issues turn into long-term problems. That means shifting from punitive scoring to people-first signals.

Here’s what smarter absence management looks like in practice.

1. Separate frequency from impact

One of the biggest flaws in the Bradford Factor is that it blends two very different things into a single distorted score; how often someone is absent and how much time they take.

A smarter approach looks at them separately:

• Absence frequency highlights patterns of repeated short-term leave.
• Absence duration highlights potential health, caring or recovery needs.

When you split these views, managers can respond appropriately. Frequent short absences might prompt a check-in conversation. Longer absences might trigger workplace adjustments or wellbeing support, not a disciplinary process.

This avoids treating predictable health needs as misconduct and stops normal behaviour from being flagged as ‘high risk’.

2. Use peer benchmarks, not blanket thresholds

The data makes one thing clear: absence patterns vary widely by industry, role and business size. So why do so many policies rely on a single trigger point?

Smarter absence management compared employees against relevant peer groups such as:

• Similar roles or seniority levels.
• Teams or departments.
• Industry norms.
• Organisation size.

This turns absence data into context-aware insight. Instead of asking ‘Is this score too high?’, leaders can ask ‘Is this pattern unusual for this role or environment?’, which is a far more useful question.

3. Focus on change, not totals

Totals are blunt but patterns are powerful. Rather than reacting to cumulative scores, modern absence strategies pay attention to to change over time such as:

• A sudden increase in short-term absences.
• A shift in absence timing (e.g. regular Mondays or Fridays).
• Changes following role, workload or team changes.

These trend-based signals allow for early, supporting intervention. Often, a simple conversation at the right moment prevents months of future absence.

4. Treat absence as a wellbeing signal, not a compliance issue

In a world where mental health, burnout and emotional exhaustion are leading causes of sick leave, absence data should be treated as a wellbeing indicator, not a rule breach.

Smarter organisations:

• Use absence patterns to trigger wellbeing check-ins.
• Train managers to have supportive, non-accusatory conversations.
• Link absence insights to EAP’s mental health resources and flexible work options.

The aim isn’t to reduce sick days at all costs, it’s to reduce the need for them.

5. Empower managers with better conversations, not harsher policies

No metric, however clever, replaces a good conversation. The most effective absence strategies in 2026 give managers:

• Clear guidance on when to check in.
• Confidence to discuss health and workload sensitively.
• Tools to record context, not just counts.

When managers understand the ‘why’ behind absence, outcomes improve, for the employee and the business.

6. Use data to support people, not scare them

Lastly, transparency matters. When employees know absence data is used to spot workload issues, improve support and prevent burnout, they’re far more likely to report time off honestly and recover properly.

That’s how you build trust and trust is what actually reduces unhealthy absence over time.

The role of technology in absence management

While you may be thinking ‘This sounds like a lot more work than a formula’. The good news is that it doesn’t have to be.

Smarter absence management isn’t powered by more admin. It’s powered by better visibility, better data and tools that remove friction for both employees and managers.

Modern HR platforms like Employment Hero make this shift practical by embedding absence management into everyday workflows, rather than treating it as a separate compliance exercise.

Simple, real-time absence tracking

Employees can log sick leave quickly and accurately, without paperwork or back-and-forth. Managers get immediate visibility into who’s off, for how long and what type of leave has been taken, all in one place. This reduces guesswork and ensures absence data is consistent, timely and complete.

Clear patterns without punitive scoring

Instead of relying on a single score, Employment Hero helps teams see absence trends over time by individual, team or business. This makes it easier to spot changes in patterns, recurring short absences or pressure points within teams and respond early with a conversation or support, rather than waiting for a threshold to be breached.

Better context for better conversations

Because absence data sits alongside role details, employment type and team structures, managers have the context they need to respond appropriately. This supports fairer, more consistent decision-making and moves absence discussions away from assumptions and toward understanding.

Wellbeing built into the experience

Absence management doesn’t sit in isolation. Employment Hero connects time off, communication and wellbeing tools in one platform, helping organisations support employees more holistically. That means absence data becomes a signal, not a judgement and part of a broader approach to employee wellbeing.

Ultimately, technology allows HR teams to spend less time administering absence and more time supporting people. Instead of policing sick days, you gain the insight needed to spot risks early, support recovery and build a healthier, more resilient workforce.

A smarter way forward with Employment Hero

Absence will always be part of working life. People get sick, life happens and sometimes the healthiest thing an employee can do is take time away. The challenge for organisations in 2026 isn’t eliminating absence, it’s responding to it in a way that’s fair, human and effective.

The data is clear: one-size-fits-all metrics like the Bradford Factor oversimplify complex human realities. They blur the line between wellbeing signals and misconduct, penalise transparency and often trigger action too late, when support would have been far more effective earlier on.

Smarter absence management looks different. It focuses on patterns instead of punishments, context instead of crude scores and conversations instead of calculations. It recognises that frequent short absences, long-term health needs and mental wellbeing all require different responses, not the same formula.

With modern HR technology, organisations no longer have to choose between insight and empathy. They can spot trends early, support managers to have better conversations and create environments where employees feel safe to recover properly and return to work well.

* Employment Hero, Bradford Factor absenteeism analysis on 13,500 anonymised and aggregated employee records across SMEs in the UK, conducted March 2025.