Transparency is extremely important to us, so we are letting you know that we may receive a commission on some of links you click on from this page. See our disclaimer.

Do management and non-management employees see workplace wellness programs similarly? And for companies looking to grow engagement in their wellness programs, what conclusions can be gained from exploring these two groups?

These were among the questions of a 2015 study titled “How do management and non-management employees perceive workplace wellness programmes? A qualitative examination” and published in the Health Education Journal.

The study's objectives were stated clearly: “The value of workplace wellness programmes (WWPs) has been established in the literature. Such programmes, however, have an increased likelihood for success when both management and non-management employees’ perspectives and needs are incorporated into development and implementation. This study aimed to identify the perspectives of each of these two employee groups as a means of informing the future development and implementation of WWPs.”

To conduct the study, “Nine focus groups were held in western Canada with participants employed at four diverse organisations consisting of >100 employees. Each participating organisation provided two separate groups, consisting of one management group and one non-management group. Participants were asked to share their perceptions, attitudes and beliefs concerning WWPs.”

The results?

“Three areas of focus were identified: (1) role of the company in WWPs, (2) elements of successful WWPs and (3) mandatory participation in WWPs.”

And additional result was key, showing the effect that a strong commitment to workplace wellness can have for a company and the program's effectiveness: “Providing a clear indication of the roles and responsibilities of both employee groups, making these initiatives part of the organisational strategic plan, demonstrating a long term commitment to such programmes, and having employees play participatory roles in the design, implementation and decision making process, are components that need consideration.”

Key conclusions include:

• “This willingness from management may indicate that support for employee health initiatives is based on presumptions of a mindset that it is good policy and the application of a WWP has the potential to increase productivity, reduce absenteeism (as a result of injury or illness) and provide individual physical and mental health benefits for their employees. Non-management participants agreed that companies should play an active role in the health and wellness of their employees. However, they also felt that there is a certain level of personal responsibility expected on the part of the employees.”
• “Central to all of these elements is an open and participatory partnership between management and non-management employees in terms of developing, implementing and maintaining a WWP. Having non-management and management employees work together provides an opportunity for both groups to openly discuss their own goals and objectives for the programme, as well as to work together to customise and tailor programmes to fit the specified goals and objectives.”