Predictors of uptake of general and tailored services to improve employee health and wellbeing

Abstract

Issue addressed: Healthy workplace programs can improve employee health and wellbeing. However, there is little research on how they are adopted by organisations.The study aimed to investigate uptake and predictors of service use amongst organisations utilising a comprehensive government-funded healthy workplace program.Methods: Employees taking part in the Healthier Workplaces WA program can access general services (ie, basic information on workplace health and wellbeing) and tailored services (ie, personalised support on implementing changes). A sample of 358 eligible program participants from 204 organisations completed a service experience survey 6 months after engaging with any service. Predictors of service use were analysed using a Kruskal-Wallis H test. Results:On average, respondents accessed 3.4 (out of 7) services. General services were accessed more frequently than tailored services. The Kruskal-Wallis H test showed that respondents working in Human Resources or Health and Safety and those from large organisations were more likely to access a greater range of services compared to employees in other roles and those working in small to medium organisations. Additionally, greater perceived support from management or co-workers was associated with greater service use. Conclusions:Respondents reported accessing general services more than tailored services. Service use was greater amongst those who perceived greater support from their managers and/or co-workers, those who worked in large organisations and those who worked in HR/OHS. So what?: These findings are informative for practitioners assisting organisations to improve health and wellbeing initiatives and service providers interested in increasing service uptake. A mix of general and tailored services is likely to be useful in building employees' capacity to increase health and wellbeing in their workplace. Support from management and co-workers is an important facilitator, and small organisations may require more focussed targeting due to the lower tendency to engage with these programs and increased benefits.

Designing attractive workplace health promotion programs

“…Person-level criteria include educational level (van der Put et al , 2020), demographics and health status (Robroek et al , 2009; Reinhardt et al , 2020; Niessen et al , 2013). Job specifics, for example, refer to psychosocial aspects (Ghesmaty Sangachin and Cavuoto, 2018), schedule (Kilpatrick et al , 2017; Tsai et al , 2019) and various other work arrangements (Tsai et al , 2019; Reinhardt et al , 2020), program elements cover comprehensiveness (Robroek et al , 2009), incentives (Robroek et al , 2009; Grossmeier et al , 2020), tailored versus general services (Talati et al , 2020), required employee copayments (Lier et al , 2019), and so on. Organizational characteristics refer to, for example, company demographics (Lier et al , 2019; Tsai et al , 2019; Dale et al , 2019), organizational prerequisites for and process of WHP implementation (van Scheppingen et al , 2015), its support (Lier et al , 2019; Grossmeier et al , 2020; Kilpatrick et al , 2017), leadership training and integrated policies (Takahashi et al , 2021).…”