Do Faith Friendly Workplaces Increase Well-Being?

Many will draw distinctions between finding your purpose and tapping into spirituality. And many more are quick to point out that they are spiritual but not religious. This predictable definitional dynamic makes me doubtful that adoption of purpose finding strategies will be the gateway to unlocking the ambivalence and stigma related to sharing one's faith in company settings. Drawing from tenets that drive social epidemics, wellness professionals and faith leaders travel in 'closed circles' and it will take 'connectors' with ties in both circles to spread the idea that workplace wellness and faith traditions can have positive synergies. Healthy People 2030 defines health and well-being as "how people think, feel, and function-at a personal and social level-and how they evaluate their lives as a whole." This editorial describes components of faith friendly organizations and argues that employee resource groups and trends in diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives could be a catalyst for greater openness to including people's faith traditions as a part of bringing their whole selves to work.

"A Bowl of Vegetables With Someone You Love": Faith, Health and Workplace Well-Being.

Worksite health and well-being initiatives will ideally be integrated with employers' efforts to address diversity, equity and inclusion issues. Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) include race, class, community health, income and other variables that companies can play a role in ameliorating. As much as spirituality is commonly espoused as a component of a holistic approach to health promotion, making space to discuss faith and health remains an uncommon strategy in the workplace wellness movement. Recognizing the value on investment (VOI) in wellness has eclipsed a return on investment as a driver of an employer's well-being strategy. This editorial argues that making space for learning about faith and health will intersect in vital ways with anti-racism work, diversity programs and similar efforts to eliminate health inequities, address SDOH and bolster the VOI of worksite well-being initiatives. A fictional dialogue between executives is used to review these issues and related literature.

Adjudicating Traditional Wellness.

There is no consensus definition for "traditional wellness" but in worksite health promotion, it usually means the wellness program is a health assessment and/or health screening offering followed by some educational programs, usually in the physical health domain. Using the term traditional wellness may belie an unawareness about or lack of appreciation for the quality improvement principles that are as applicable to the health of a profession as they are to the growth of an organization. This editorial examines how the use of the term traditional wellness is a reflection on our professional zeitgeist. Five ideas that attempt to explain misunderstandings about differing approaches to worksite health promotion are offered along with 5 ways we may be able to make peace with traditional wellness.

Just Moments: A Letter to Dr Peter Erickson.

Practicing mindfulness is usually characterized as being "in the moment" and is most often associated with an effort to manage individual illness, stress, or well-being. This editorial memorializes my dear friend Pete Erickson who was an exemplar to making every moment count. But more importantly, moments he made with others were "just moments" in service to his community, moments that made others experience their community and their health system as more just places. In defining "just moments," I cite the paper "Collective Well-being to Improve Population Health Outcomes" where the authors argued that well-being is a function of a group and that domains such as "connectedness" and "contribution" may have as much to do with well-being as does our usual focus on individual self-care practices.

Mindful Eating (Not the Kind You Think) and an Interview With Dr Kevin Walker.

Could it be that self-help concepts like mindfulness meditation have a short shelf life because they're just that, too much about the self and not enough about something far more important? This editorial describes Kevin Walker's research and his new book, "The Grand Food Bargain and the Mindless Drive for More." Walker's book shows why the dozens of federal and state agencies with a slice of accountability for food health and safety are predictably and routinely outgunned by the food industry with respect to influencing the public's health. Describing the dozens of interagency agreements relating to agriculture policies, Walker writes that "food safety in America is held together using the policy equivalent of baling wire and duct tape." Most health promotion professionals who consider the term mindful eating likely first think about principles that relate to being present and techniques that put you in closer touch with the flavors, colors, or textures of your food. In addition to focusing on how creamy a texture feels on our tongues, might advocacy for "mindful eating" have a more abiding impact if it brought with it a deep appreciation for how our food choices affect the health and sustainability of our communities and our Mother Earth? Changing food from an afterthought to a daily reminder about environmental sustainability is a multidimensional challenge that will require multisectoral partnerships and solutions.

On Voluntariness in Wellness: Considering Organizational Health Contingent Incentives.

Some would argue that if taking an examination to receive an incentive is not mandatory, it's voluntary no matter the size of the monetary reward. Others have concerns with how often employers use the word "required" when communicating how employees can earn an incentive. This in spite of clear rules that indicate "health contingent" incentive designs (those based on health measures rather than on completing activities) are an either/or proposition. That is, you can either earn (this amount) by (achieving a clinical standard) or by (participating in or attaining an alternative standard). This editorial examines the merits and demerits of organizational health contingent use of incentives. It is posited that employers can best satisfy a voluntariness standard in their use of financial incentives in wellness programs when the use of incentives are well integrated into a measurably robust, organizational culture that visibly values health; and when all employees are well versed in the meaning of, and opportunities for, reasonable alternatives for earning an incentive. Concerns about the administrative burden behind this idea and other potential unintended consequences of including measures of a culture of health to meet a voluntariness standard are also presented.

Nutrition Research Special Issue and an Interview With Marion Nestle by Paul Terry.

As much as the field of health promotion has benefited mightily in the past decades from Internet abetted access to unlimited health content, our field is also experiencing the best of times and the worst of times. When it comes to our core work of supporting healthy decision-making for individuals, organizations, and communities, the unfettered, voluminous material available has, unimaginably, made facts seem fickle. I am delighted to have Dr Marion Nestle's insights as a preamble to this special issue of the journal. Educating about nutrition and food choices, in particular, has become as much a contest between competing interests and commercial forces, as it has been a discipline guided by credible professionals. I am all in on our Constitution's First Amendment, and having live abroad, I am endlessly smitten with America's robust expression and freedom of speech. But I wonder if our forefathers had seen the Internet coming whether they might have added more stipulations about telling the truth. This special issue of the American Journal of Health Promotion is dedicated to nutrition research where new discoveries, and impassioned scientists like Dr Nestle, provide the light needed to grow fresh knowledge. Exposing both academics and the public to well-done studies about how food choices are influenced is ever more crucial in an era of alternative facts about what constitutes healthy eating.

The ACTIVATE study: results from a group-randomized controlled trial comparing a traditional worksite health promotion program with an activated consumer program.

PURPOSE. This study compares a traditional worksite-based health promotion program with an activated consumer program and a control program DESIGN. Group randomized controlled trial with 18-month intervention. SETTING. Two large Midwestern companies. SUBJECTS. Three hundred and twenty employees (51% response). INTERVENTION. The traditional health promotion intervention offered population-level campaigns on physical activity, nutrition, and stress management. The activated consumer intervention included population-level campaigns for evaluating health information, choosing a health benefits plan, and understanding the risks of not taking medications as prescribed. The personal development intervention (control group) offered information on hobbies. The interventions also offered individual-level coaching for high risk individuals in both active intervention groups. MEASURES. Health risk status, general health status, consumer activation, productivity, and the ability to evaluate health information. ANALYSIS. Multivariate analyses controlled for baseline differences among the study groups. RESULTS. At the population level, compared with baseline performance, the traditional health promotion intervention improved health risk status, consumer activation, and the ability to recognize reliable health websites. Compared with baseline performance, the activated consumer intervention improved consumer activation, productivity, and the ability to recognize reliable health websites. At the population level, however, only the activated consumer intervention improved any outcome more than the control group did; that outcome was consumer activation. At the individual level for high risk individuals, both traditional health coaching and activated consumer coaching positively affected health risk status and consumer activation. In addition, both coaching interventions improved participant ability to recognize a reliable health website. Consumer activation coaching also significantly improved self-reported productivity. CONCLUSION. An effective intervention can change employee health risk status and activation both at the population level and at the individual high risk level. However, program engagement at the population level was low, indicating that additional promotional strategies, such as greater use of incentives, need to be examined. Less intensive coaching can be as effective as more intensive, albeit both interventions produced modest behavior change and retention in the consumer activation arm was most difficult. Further research is needed concerning recruitment and retention methods that will enable populations to realize the full potential of activated consumerism.