The Healthy Lifeworks Project: the role of organisational health in the personal health of employees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to present the results of a three‐year comprehensive workplace initiative which provided an unprecedented opportunity to explore the potential relationship between organisational health, stress, and health outcomes. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 325 employees participating in a comprehensive workplace wellness intervention taking place in a large governmental organisation. Organisational health was measured using a 16‐item measure of organisational health indicators and a four‐item measure of health culture. Personal health outcomes were assessed using 12 indicators: personal wellness profile, health age, blood pressure, nutrition, fat intake, fibre intake, alcohol use, fitness, smoking status, cancer risk, stress, and good health practices. Findings Analyses indicated that after controlling for gender and age, organisational health was associated with increased personal wellness, lower health age, better overall nutrition, reduced fat intake, increased fibre intake, reduced alcohol consumption, increased fitness, reduced cancer risk, lower stress, and more positive health practices. For several outcome measures, organisational health had a stronger impact on personal health for men. Personal health of correctional workers and youth workers was most influenced by organisational health. Finally, stress mediated the relationship between organisational health and health outcomes for all measures of wellness except for alcohol consumption. Originality/value Organisational health is often overlooked by employers when considering the personal health of employees. Interventions aimed at influencing organisational health (generally considered a low cost intervention) can have beneficial influences on personal health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".