IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v26y1988i5p491-501.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate characteristics and worksite health promotion programs: Survey findings from fortune 500 companies

Author

Listed:
  • Hollander, Roberta B.
  • Lengermann, Joseph J.

Abstract

A study was carried out to assess the nature and extent of worksite health promotion programs in Fortune 500 companies. Growth and interest in worksite health promotion continues at a remarkable rate. Fortune 500 firms are a good barometer of the state of the art of programs in work settings because these companies have large numbers of employees, an interest in cost savings, and expertise to invest in innovative efforts. Data collection consisted of questionnaires sent to the medical officer or Chief Executive Officer of all companies appearing on the 1984 Fortune 500 list. The following issues were addressed: whether companies offered worksite programs; what health promotion activities were provided in their programs; whether organizations had plans to start up or expand programs; what organizational support existed for programs (i.e. who pays, on whose time employees participate, when activities are offered, and what types of personnel are hired to staff programs); and whether these companies applied needs assessments, evaluation and cost analysis in their programs. Differences in these characteristics were examined in relation to the organizational variables of size (number of employees), Fortune 500 rank and type of industry (low-technology versus high-technology). The response rate for the survey was 49.4% (n=247). Results of the study indicate a high level of health promotion activity in Fortune 500 firms. Out of the total group respondents, two-thirds (n=164) report having worksite programs and two-thirds of organizations with programs have plans to expand their health promotion offerings. One-third of responding organizations without programs planned to initiate them. The health promotion activities provided are numerous and varied, and within units that have programs rates of employee eligibility are reported to be high. However, the participation rates reported are appreciably lower. It is of special interest that, in general, the higher ranked, larger and high-technology companies are more likely to have programs; offer more activities in programs; have plans for program extension; use a model of sharing costs of, and time to participate in program activities; make greater use of health professionals; and utilize more often needs assessment, evaluation and cost analysis techniques. The results of this study underscore the importance of examining a broad constellation of factors surrounding worksite programs. Given the organizational literature reviewed, it is likely that the characteristics of Fortune 500 programs documented here will serve as models for programs in midsize and smaller companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Hollander, Roberta B. & Lengermann, Joseph J., 1988. "Corporate characteristics and worksite health promotion programs: Survey findings from fortune 500 companies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 491-501, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:26:y:1988:i:5:p:491-501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(88)90382-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helen Lingard & Noni Holmes, 2001. "Understandings of occupational health and safety risk control in small business construction firms: barriers to implementing technological controls," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 217-226.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:26:y:1988:i:5:p:491-501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.