Process evaluation of a tailored workplace intervention designed to promote sustainable working in a rapidly changing world

Abstract

Increasing numbers of people are employed in sedentary occupations, spending large amounts of time sitting at work which is detrimental to health and wellbeing. Evidence-based guidance is required to intervene to reduce sedentary behaviour, encourage physical activity and promote sustainable working. This article presents a process evaluation of a successful workplace intervention Walking Works Wonders, shown to be effective in improving health, job satisfaction and motivation (Haslam et al. 2018). In this qualitative process evaluation employees reported an increased awareness of their sedentary time and they particularly valued the monitoring of activity using pedometers. They described changes to their working and leisure time activity to accumulate more steps. Participants reported improved physiological and psychological health outcomes, improved working relations with colleagues, changes in dietary behaviour and involving their families in physical activity. The results highlight elements of the intervention that encouraged healthy and more sustainable working practices.Practitioner summary: This study provides the employees' perspective on the effective elements of a workplace intervention which encouraged physical activity and reduced sitting time. The results offer valuable insights for practitioners aiming to develop interventions to improve health and facilitate more sustainable working practices in a rapidly changing world of work.

Systematic Review of Intervention Studies to Foster Sustainable Employability Core Components: Implications for Workplace Promotion

“…With a weak quality of evidence, a positive effect for valuable work outcomes was found only in four out of nine interventions covering no more than two SE core components in their intervention content [44,45,48,51]. Only three out of five studies addressing the health component in their intervention content found positive health outcome effects [38,40,43].…”

“…Intervention effects, those on outcomes in line with intervention content or not, may be explained with complex mediating and moderating processes [77]. In our review of studies, only five out of fourteen studies included an intervention process evaluation [36,37,41,51,78]. When the program failed, the authors reported reasons such as a short duration, a lack of training frequency, an inadequate level of skills, or low adherence to the program [34,35,39,49,78].…”