IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i9p4707-d545420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development and Implementation of ‘Just Right’ Physical Behavior in Industrial Work Based on the Goldilocks Work Principle—A Feasibility Study

Author

Listed:
  • Anders Fritz Lerche

    (The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
    Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

  • Svend Erik Mathiassen

    (Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Occupational and Public Health Sciences, University of Gävle, 801 76 Gävle, Sweden)

  • Charlotte Lund Rasmussen

    (The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark)

  • Leon Straker

    (School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia)

  • Karen Søgaard

    (Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark
    Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

  • Andreas Holtermann

    (The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
    Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

Abstract

The Goldilocks Work Principle expresses that productive work should be redesigned to comprise physical behaviors of different intensities in a composition promoting workers’ health and fitness. This study is the first to assess the feasibility of redesigning work in an industrial setting according to the Goldilocks Work Principle. We recruited workers ( n = 20) from a brewery in Denmark, and we conducted a participatory 16-week intervention including a workshop and two consultations. The workshop aimed to support the workers in modifying their work, while the consultations assisted the eventual implementation. Feasibility was evaluated as per three aspects: (1) developing modifications of work, (2) implementing these modifications, and (3) changing physical behavior and self-reported fatigue, pain and energy. The three aspects were addressed through records completed by the workers, measurements of workers’ physical behavior and intensity during ‘control’ workdays (i.e., usual work) and ‘intervention’ workdays (i.e., modified work), and self-reported fatigue, pain and energy level following both types of workday. Five modifications to work were developed, and three of these five modifications were implemented. To some extent, physical behavior and intensity changed as intended during ‘intervention’ workdays compared to ‘control’ workdays. Workers were also less fatigued, had less pain, and had more energy after ‘intervention’ workdays. These results suggest that it is feasible to develop and implement modified work based on the Goldilocks Work Principle among industrial workers. However, we also identified several barriers to the implementation of such modifications.

Suggested Citation

  • Anders Fritz Lerche & Svend Erik Mathiassen & Charlotte Lund Rasmussen & Leon Straker & Karen Søgaard & Andreas Holtermann, 2021. "Development and Implementation of ‘Just Right’ Physical Behavior in Industrial Work Based on the Goldilocks Work Principle—A Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-22, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4707-:d:545420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4707/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4707/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anders Fritz Lerche & Maja Vilhelmsen & Kathrine Greby Schmidt & Rasmus Kildedal & Natja Launbo & Pernille Kold Munch & Mark Lidegaard & Sandra Schade Jacobsen & Charlotte Lund Rasmussen & Svend Erik , 2020. "Can Childcare Work Be Designed to Promote High Intensity Physical Activity for Improved Fitness and Health? A Proof of Concept Study of the Goldilocks Principle," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-23, October.
    2. Margo Ketels & Charlotte Lund Rasmussen & Mette Korshøj & Nidhi Gupta & Dirk De Bacquer & Andreas Holtermann & Els Clays, 2020. "The Relation between Domain-Specific Physical Behaviour and Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Compositional Data Analysis on the Physical Activity Health Paradox Using Accelerometer-Assesse," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Jonas Mundwiler & Ulla Schüpbach & Thomas Dieterle & Jörg Daniel Leuppi & Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss & David Paul Wolfer & David Miedinger & Stefanie Brighenti-Zogg, 2017. "Association of Occupational and Leisure-Time Physical Activity with Aerobic Capacity in a Working Population," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Svend Erik Mathiassen & David M Hallman & Eugene Lyskov & Staffan Hygge, 2014. "Can Cognitive Activities during Breaks in Repetitive Manual Work Accelerate Recovery from Fatigue? A Controlled Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-11, November.
    5. David M. Hallman & Nidhi Gupta & Leticia Bergamin Januario & Andreas Holtermann, 2021. "Work-Time Compositions of Physical Behaviors and Trajectories of Sick Leave Due to Musculoskeletal Pain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-11, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suzanne Lerato Merkus & Pieter Coenen & Mikael Forsman & Stein Knardahl & Kaj Bo Veiersted & Svend Erik Mathiassen, 2022. "An Exploratory Study on the Physical Activity Health Paradox—Musculoskeletal Pain and Cardiovascular Load during Work and Leisure in Construction and Healthcare Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Kathrine Greby Schmidt & Rasmus Kildedal & Anders Fritz Lerche & Maja Vilhelmsen & Charlotte Lund Rasmussen & Svend Erik Mathiassen & Leon Straker & Andreas Holtermann, 2021. "Does Childcare Work Promote Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Health? A Cross-Sectional Study of Danish Childcare Workers Based on Accelerometry and Heart Rate Measurements," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Susanna Mixter & Svend Erik Mathiassen & Petra Lindfors & Kent Dimberg & Helena Jahncke & Eugene Lyskov & David M. Hallman, 2020. "Stress-Related Responses to Alternations between Repetitive Physical Work and Cognitive Tasks of Different Difficulties," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-18, November.
    4. André Scholz & Johannes Wendsche & Argang Ghadiri & Usha Singh & Theo Peters & Stefan Schneider, 2019. "Methods in Experimental Work Break Research: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-23, October.
    5. José M. Núñez-Sánchez & Ramón Gómez-Chacón & Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado & Jerónimo García-Fernández, 2021. "Corporate Well-Being Programme in COVID-19 Times. The Mahou San Miguel Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, May.
    6. Margo Ketels & Charlotte Lund Rasmussen & Mette Korshøj & Nidhi Gupta & Dirk De Bacquer & Andreas Holtermann & Els Clays, 2020. "The Relation between Domain-Specific Physical Behaviour and Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Compositional Data Analysis on the Physical Activity Health Paradox Using Accelerometer-Assesse," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-17, October.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4707-:d:545420. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.