Corporate characteristics and worksite health promotion programs: survey findings from Fortune 500 companies
R B Hollander,J J Lengermann
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(88)90382-6
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 of 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 expansion; 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.