“Why would you want to stand?” an account of the lived experience of employees taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention

Abstract

BackgroundSit-stand desk interventions have the potential to reduce workplace sedentary behaviour and improve employee health. However, the extent of sit-stand desk use varies between employees and in different organisational contexts. Framed by organisational cultural theory and product design theory, this study examined employees’ lived experience of taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention, to understand the processes influencing feasibility and acceptability.MethodsParticipant observations and qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 employees from two office-based workplaces in the UK, as part of a process evaluation that ran alongside a pilot RCT of a workplace sit-stand desk intervention. Observational field notes and transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsThree themes related to the experience of using a sit-stand desk at work were generated: employees’ relationship with their sit-stand desk; aspirations and outcomes related to employee health and productivity; and cultural norms and interpersonal relationships. The perceived usability of the desk varied depending on how employees interacted with the desk within their personal and organisational context. Employees reported that the perceived influence of the desk on their productivity levels shaped use of the desk; those who perceived that standing increased energy and alertness tended to stand more often. Sit-stand desks were voiced as being more acceptable than intervention strategies that involve leaving the desk, as productivity was conflated with being at the desk.ConclusionsThe findings indicate a range of organisational, social-cultural and individual-level factors that shape the feasibility and acceptability of sit-stand desk use, and suggest strategies for improving employees’ experiences of using a sit-stand desk at work, which might positively influence sedentary behaviour reduction and health.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02172599, 22nd June 2014 (prospectively registered).

The Benefits and Complexities of Integrating Mixed Method Findings Using the Pillar Integration Process: A Workplace Health Intervention Case Study

“…The first version was a multi-component intervention which was based on the socio-ecological model and included organizational (emails from senior management), environmental (sit-stand desk) and individual (motivational interview-style phone calls) strategies to encourage increased standing and physical activity. The second version of the intervention included a sit-stand desk only; see Hall et al, (2019a) For device-based data to be included within the analysis, the minimum criteria of nine hours wear per day, four hours wear during work hours (9am -5pm) on weekdays, two valid days, and one valid week day, had to be met. GT3X+ data was processed using ActiLife 6.10.3 and the raw data was summarized into 15 second epoch activity counts.…”

Promoting Physical Wellbeing in the Workplace: Providing Working Adults with a Tool to Reduce their Sedentary Behavior

“…(2) using SSDs in an environment where it is not common, causes an increased psychological discomfort and fear of disapproval; (3) people may be unaware how to properly use SSDs often resulting in an "all-or-nothing" mentality; (4) sitting is a subconscious habit and there is a general lack of motivation to alter this behavior; (5) people may be unaware of the negative impacts of SB or the physical and psychological benefits that correlate to properly using SSDs; (6) there is a perception of not being able to work effectively whilst reducing sitting. Literature sources: (Cole et al, 2015), (Niven & Hu, 2018), (Henderson et al, 2018), (Meyer et al, 2016), (Mansfield et al, 2018), (Hall et al, 2019), (Dutta et al, 2015), (Greenwood-Hickman, et al, 2016).…”

Working From Home: Experiences of Home-Working, Health Behavior and Well-Being During the 2020 UK COVID-19 Lockdown

“… 18 Conversely, participants in workplace sitting-reduction interventions often describe social norms around appearing dutiful and productive, which can discourage taking breaks from sitting. 19 , 20 Other studies have documented how colleagues create local cultural norms within the office that prescribe unhealthy food choices, such as sharing cakes or biscuits with colleagues or clients. 21 , 22 Evidence from dieting workers has shown that colleagues can be a source of support for healthy eating, demonstrating the potential impact of the workplace social environment on eating behaviors.…”

“…For example, in-person interactions may require walking to colleagues' workspaces or meeting rooms 18 . Conversely, participants in workplace sitting-reduction interventions often describe social norms around appearing dutiful and productive, which can discourage taking breaks from sitting 19,20 . Other studies have documented how colleagues create local cultural norms within the office that prescribe unhealthy food choices, such as sharing cakes or biscuits with colleagues or clients 21,22 .…”